Engineering, construction and infrastructure projects face the same difficulty: who shoulders the unpredictability of time and cost in building something that doesn’t exist?
Because of this unpredictability, construction projects often end in disputes about delay, defects and price. The outcome of such disputes equally has a large measure of unpredictability. However too frequently construction disputes proceed as if the problem of uncertainty does not exist. But we can help.
We strive to avoid processes which surrender decision making to third parties (adjudicators, arbitrators or judges) and instead approach disputes strategically, including the use of Dispute Navigator (our scientific risk valuation model), collaborative techniques in our dealings with opponents and open channels for information: all aimed at pricing the risk and uncertainty intrinsic to the dispute.
We use adjudication tactically where our opponents are not recognising their risk profile. We recognise that adjudicators generally make up their own minds about disputes and the law of diminishing returns applies strongly to the amount of resource invested and we price accordingly.
Examples of work
Accolade v Volker Fitzpatrick - advised on one of the largest and most difficult construction disputes of recent years in the TCC. We and our client were at the forefront of the complex settlement agreement that resolved a dispute that threatened the survival of some of the parties involved
Carillion v Emcor & Others- representing the main contractor against members of the supply chain arising out of delays and cost overruns in the construction of the Rolls building, which houses the Technology and Construction Court
Adjudication: We have acted for main contractors across the full spectrum of construction disputes including payment and payless notices, allegations of defective design and workmanship and final account disputes. On one project we launched a series of six successful multi-million pound adjudications arising under a framework contract for major infrastructure and highways works to force the employer into settlement
Glazing disputes, including 125 OBS Ltd v Lendlease: We have acted in a series of disputes around failure of the glass panels in tower cladding systems as a consequence of nickel sulphide inclusions and other poor manufacturing issues
Malmaison Liverpool – Acting for Morgan Sindall in the TCC litigation concerning alleged defects in the design and construction of the Malmaison Hotel and apartments in Liverpool and the apportionment of liability for consequential remedial works under a business sale agreement with Amec Foster Wheeler