header-logo header-logo

11 January 2013
Issue: 7543 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Building contract

Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd v Severfield – Rowen Structures Ltd [2012] EWHC 3652 (TCC), [2012] All ER (D) 239 (Dec)

In all delay cases it was necessary to show that the claiming party was delayed by the factors of which it complained; it did not follow as a matter of logic, let alone practice, on a construction or fabrication project, that, simply because a variation was issued or that information was provided later than programmed or that free issue materials were issued later in the programme than envisaged originally, the claimant was delayed. If the real cause of the delay was, for example, overwork or disorganisation within the claimant, the fact that there had been variations, late instructions or information or late issue of materials was simply coincidental

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll