This Practice Note provides information on Sanderson and Bullock orders. It discusses what they are, the circumstances in which they can be made and the rationale behind the making of such orders. Sanderson and Bullock orders—what are they? Sanderson and Bullock orders arise in circumstances where a claim (in contract or in tort) is brought against two or more separate defendants but where the claimant is only successful against one of those defendants. The orders derive from the following decisions: • Sanderson v Blyth Theatre Company (1903)—in which the court ordered the unsuccessful defendant to pay the successful defendant’s costs (a Sanderson order) • Bullock v London General Omnibus Co (1907)—in which the court ordered the claimant to pay the successful defendant’s costs, but permitted the claimant to add those costs to the costs the claimant was to recover from the unsuccessful defendant (a Bullock order) A Sanderson order is sometimes also referred to as a Bullock order (Mayer v Harte (1960)). They are closely related but are not

This Practice Note looks at the Scheme for Construction Contracts, as contained in: • the schedule to the Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998, as amended by the Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998 (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2011 (the English Scheme) • the schedule to the Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998, as amended by the Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998 (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2011 (the Welsh Scheme) • the schedule to the Scheme for Construction Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 1998, as amended by the Scheme for Construction Contracts (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2011 (the Scottish Scheme) As the English, Welsh and Scottish Schemes share a number of similarities, they are referred to together in this Practice Note as 'the Scheme'. Where a provision is different in one or more of the individual schemes this is specifically highlighted. The regulations in the Scheme supplement the provisions of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (HGCRA 1996) as amended by the provisions

This week's edition of Construction weekly highlights includes a case in which the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) considered whether an employer and a contractor had entered into a formal construction contract (CLS v WLG Evans), the signing of a memorandum of understanding (MoU) between the International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) and the Solar Impulse Foundation and a webinar hosted by the FIDIC that will examine issues relating to investment for large-scale infrastructure.

This week's edition of Construction weekly highlights includes a Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) replacement direction on the installation of fibre optic cabling in existing non-higher-risk buildings (non-HRBs) in England, and a Hong Kong Court of First Instance decision arising from a construction contract on security pending a challenge to the enforcement of an arbitral award and allegations of arbitrator bias.

A pension transfer occurs when a person's entitlements under one pension scheme are moved to another pension scheme. The transferring scheme transfers relevant assets to the receiving scheme and the receiving scheme becomes responsible for the provision of benefits in respect of the relevant person. The members of all UK registered pension schemes which are personal pension schemes have an overriding statutory right to transfer the cash equivalent value of their benefits to another pension arrangement, subject to meeting certain prescribed conditions. Many personal pension schemes also permit transfers out in a broader range of circumstances than those in which the statutory right arises, eg: • partial transfers • transfers of benefits that are in drawdown, and • transfers of particular assets in non-cash form It is important in practice that transfers paid from personal pension schemes are paid in circumstances that amount to the payment of a recognised transfer for HMRC purposes and that do not unwittingly lose the benefit of any tax-related protections and statuses that the member may have. Personal

1 Product recall clause—pro-supplier 1.1 The Customer shall immediately notify the Supplier if it becomes aware of any complaint or claim which indicates that a product supplied by the Supplier may be defective, faulty or unsafe in any way. The Customer must send to the Supplier: 1.1.1 a copy of the complaint or claim, and any correspondence exchanged with the complainant or third party; and 1.1.2 details of the product supplied, the batch and serial number of the product (or other marking to aid traceability), the date on which the product was supplied by the Supplier to the Customer, and the date on which the Customer supplied it to the complainant (or other third party). 1.2 The Customer is required to keep and maintain, for at least ten years following last supply of the product, appropriate records to enable all products supplied by the Supplier to be traced. These records shall include serial and batch numbers (or other marking to aid traceability), delivery dates and details of the party who

Commercial analysis: Glenn Kangisser, partner, and Maren Strandevold, associate, both at Haynes and Boone CDG, consider the practical implications of the judgment in Seadrill Ghana Offshore Ltd v Tullow Ghana Ltd, in which the Commercial Court held that the defendant was not entitled to terminate a drilling contract for force majeure, and commented on the exercise of reasonable endeavours to overcome a force majeure event.

Property analysis: David McGuirk, partner at Eversheds Sutherland, and Anna Bevan-Jones, principal associate at the firm, examine the High Court’s decision in Eason v Wong and suggest the case helps to clarify a number of points that arise from the principle that purchasers who have paid any part of the purchase money pursuant to a sale contract could be entitled to an equitable lien over the property.

Commercial analysis: This case involved the consideration of the terms of a consultancy agreement which were partly written and partly oral—the effect of a schedule that was referred to in the agreement, but which did not exist, whether or not commission was due after termination of the contract, and the principles of quantum meruit. Written by Michael Budd, partner and head of company commercial at Longmores Solicitors.

HM Treasury (HMT) has published a near-final version of the Payment Services and Payment Accounts (Contract Terminations) (Amendment) Regulations 2024, which sets out rule changes on provider-initiated terminations of payment service contracts. An accompanying policy note has also been published. The government welcomes technical comments on the draft legislation by 14 April 2024, and intends to lay this legislation before Parliament in Summer 2024.

Tax analysis: In Exchequer Solutions Ltd v HMRC, the First-Tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) agreed with HMRC that there was no mutuality of obligation between individuals working in the construction industry and the umbrella company employing them under an overarching contract. Each individual job was effectively a separate employment, and individuals were therefore commuting between their home and a permanent workplace, meaning that travel expenses were not deductible.

The Law Society has recommended that the salary for aspiring solicitors should be increased to £24,320 outside of London and £27,418 within London for qualifying work experience (QWE) for the Solicitors Qualifying Exam (SQE) or during a training contract. The recommended minimum salary is reviewed in June each year as a matter of voluntary good practice before the revised figure comes into effect in September. The current recommended minimum salary for trainees is £23,122 outside of London and £26,068 within London.