1 Background information Project name [Insert project name] Author [Insert author name ] Sponsor [Insert project sponsor name(s)] Date [Insert date business case was prepared] 2 Distribution list Name Department or organisation [Insert the name of any stakeholders who needs to be sent a copy of this business case] [Insert the department or organisation this person works in] [Insert name] [Insert the department or organisation this person works in] [Insert name] [Insert the department or organisation this person works in] [Insert name] [Insert the department or organisation this person works in] 3 Project team Project role Name Location Contact details [Insert role, eg Project lead] [Insert project lead’s name] [Insert details of where this person is located, eg in which office] [Insert details of how this person can be contacted, eg email address and/or telephone number] [Insert role] [Insert name] [Insert location] [Insert details] [Insert role] [Insert name] [Insert location] [Insert details] [Insert role] [Insert name] [Insert location] [Insert details] [Insert role] [Insert name] [Insert location] [Insert details] 4 Executive summary 4.1 Business case summary This business case outlines [state how the project you are proposing will address a business need, eg this business case outlines how investing in and implementing new compliance training software supported by a learning management system will help this organisation to achieve its business objective of building a culture of compliance]. This business case also discusses potential

Love it or loathe it, social media is here to stay. Used appropriately, it can help you to build a strong personal online brand. However, as we have all seen in the press, if we fail to think things through before using social media, it can all go wrong very quickly. This Practice Note will help you to create a social media presence which works for you and your organisation and provides guidance on: • what everyone else can see • setting social media goals • your tone of voice • ideas for generating original content • building strong virtual networks • lessons from Chris Hadfield—‘How to be a zero’ • getting to grips with hashtags • when to avoid posting What can everyone else see you doing? ‘If you wouldn’t say it out loud to a room full of your peers, and your mum, then don’t say it on social media’—is a rough and ready guide but in the rapidly evolving world of social media, it’s still a great

This Practice Note sets out the differing positions on building and fire safety in England, Scotland and Wales for those practitioners engaged in projects and/or disputes in these separate jurisdictions. Each of the Westminster Parliament, the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Senedd have sought to review their regulatory frameworks on building and fire safety in response to the tragic Grenfell Tower fire, and have chosen to take slightly different approaches on certain matters of detail. Background—the Hackitt report The Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety was an independent review commissioned by the UK government. Its aim was to assess the effectiveness of building and fire safety regulations in England, and related compliance and enforcement issues, with a focus on multi-occupancy high-rise residential buildings. It was led by Dame Judith Hackitt (the former chair of the Health and Safety Executive), and is often referred to as the Hackitt review or Hackitt report. The final report was published on 17 May 2018, and identified (among other things) the following issues:

This Practice Note summarises decisions of the courts in building and fire safety that have arisen following the Grenfell Tower fire, considered relevant to construction lawyers. Details of key landlord and tenant-related judgments concerning the Building Safety Act 2022, made by or arising from the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) (FTT) and Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) (UT) (including cases concerning remediation orders and remediation contribution orders), are considered in Practice Note: Building Safety Act 2022—landlord and tenant cases tracker. For more information on fire and building safety defect claims, see Practice Notes: • Fire safety defect claims for construction lawyers • Defective Premises Act—work in relation to dwellings • Building Safety Act 2022—liability for cladding and construction products • Building Act 1984—claims for breach of building regulations • Building liability orders 2026 Taylor Wimpey v Taylor Woodrow Topics: Defective Premises Act 1972; strike-out; arbitration; abuse Details: The TCC dismissed an application to strike out a claim under DPA 1972 brought by a subsequent owner of residential property, notwithstanding an earlier arbitration in which its parent company's

The outer shell of a building, which separates the building’s interior from the outside elements. This will therefore usually comprise the roof, outer walls and floor of the building.

Family analysis: Professor Gillian Black, Commissioner at the Scottish Law Commission, Professor Nick Hopkins, Commissioner at the Law Commission of England and Wales and Christine Gentry, Research Assistant at the Law Commission of England and Wales, set out the key details of the Law Commissions’ report ‘Building families through surrogacy: a new law’, published on 29 March 2023, the background to the report and the Law Commissions’ recommendations.

Design software that builds an electronic model of the building that contains digital information about construction details, materials, and schedules. The software can provide full architectural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing and structural drawings.

Law360, London: The UK government has amended the Building (Approved Inspectors etc.) Regulations 2010 so that since 28 July 2022, private building control inspectors, previously called approved inspectors—in England and Wales are no longer required to hold public and professional indemnity insurance under a government-approved scheme.

A lease granted in consideration for the tenant erecting a building or carrying out works to existing buildings is sometimes called a ‘building lease’. When a building lease falls within the scope of section 19(1)(b) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 (LTA 1927), in certain circumstances, statute intervenes to override the express contractual alienation provisions in the lease. This Practice Note looks at the scope and effect of LTA 1927, s 19(1)(b). For general guidance on assignment and underletting, see: Assignment and underletting—overview. Building leases within LTA 1927, s 19(1)(b) LTA 1927, s 19(1)(b) applies to certain leases granted: • for a term of more than 40 years • in consideration wholly or partially of the erection, or the substantial improvement, addition or alteration of buildings • where the landlord is not a government department, a local or public authority, or a statutory or public utility company, and • the lease is not of an agricultural holding, a farm business tenancy or a mining lease LTA 1927, s 19!1)(b) does not apply to: • a ‘new’ tenancy within

The Building Safety Bill received Royal Assent on 28 April 2022, becoming the Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA 2022). BSA 2022 brought forward extensive reforms of the regulatory regimes and standards for building and fire safety and construction products through a variety of secondary legislation. BSA 2022 also augmented the legal protections available to parties affected by building safety defects. It extended the limitation periods applicable to certain defect claims, and created new rights exercisable in relation to inadequate building works and construction products. These measures included provision for the High Court to make ‘building liability orders’ (BLOs). BLOs may be granted against companies associated with a party that is liable in respect of defective building work, with the effect that the associated company will become jointly, or jointly and severally, liable with that original company. This Practice Note provides guidance on the sections of BSA 2022 that deal with BLOs, and looks at when BLOs may be sought and granted. Throughout this Practice Note, the term ‘applicant’ is used to describe the party seeking the BLO, and

Construction analysis: The Technology and Construction Court (TCC) refused an application to grant orders for information in connection with building liability orders (BLOs), sought under section 132 of the Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA 2022). It found that three of the four respondents were not entities against whom information orders could be made. As for the remaining respondent, it did not appear to the court that that entity was subject to a 'relevant liability', within the meaning of BSA 2022, s 130. This appears to be the first case in which the court has considered an application for an information order, and provides abundant practical guidance on the scope of BSA 2022, s 132.

Construction analysis: The Technology and Construction Court (TCC) refused permission to appeal against building liability orders (BLOs) made under sections 130–131 of the Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA 2022) and declined both a stay of execution and extended time for payment. The judgment confirms that anticipatory BLOs and adjudication liabilities may fall within the statutory regime, while emphasising the broad discretionary nature of the ‘just and equitable’ test. The court also reaffirmed the strict evidential burden on defendants seeking to resist enforcement of adjudication-related liabilities, particularly where group support or associated individuals may provide funding. The decision strengthens the practical utility of BLOs as an enforcement mechanism in building safety disputes and signals judicial reluctance to delay recovery on inadequately supported financial evidence. Produced in partnership with Georgia Whiting of Capita plc.