header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
08 May 2008 / Alexander Hickey , Elspeth Owens
Issue: 7320 / Categories: Features , Local government , Property , Housing
printer mail-detail

Withholding tactics

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Contractors need to beware of employers giving early withholding notices, say Alexander Hickey and Elspeth Owens

In Reinwood v Brown [2008] UKHL 12, [2008] All ER (D) 283 (Feb) the House of Lords has revisited withholding notices under s 111 and the payment regime of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (HGCRA 1996) as incorporated in the Joint Contracts Tribunal Standard Form of Building Contract 1998 edition (JCT 1998). In Reinwood the law lords gave another ruling in favour of employers which may prove to be as controversial as last year's decision in Melville Dundas Ltd (in receivership) v George Wimpey UK Ltd and others [2007] UKHL 18, [2007] All ER (D) 226 (Apr). HGCRA 1996, s 111 provides:

  •   
    (1)     A party to a construction contract may not withhold payment after the final date for payment of a sum due under the contract unless he has given an effective notice of intention to withhold payment.
  •   
    (2)     To be effective
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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll