Editor’s comment
Infrastructure red flags ignored
Potential problems with delivery of the UK’s ambitious infrastructure plans have been highlighted by the Public Accounts Committee in a hard hitting report. Editor Nick Barrett finds the MPs wondering if government even listens.

News
In News this month we report on procurement management shortcomings being blamed for delaying London’s tube modernisation by five years; new Scottish government procurement rules coming into force; and the Budget being used to reaffirm government commitment to Building Information Modelling.

Legal terms explained
Rachel Thompson of Pinsent Masons explains what is meant by legal privilege.

Guest editor
BIM – time to embrace change
Guest editor Vijay Bange of Trowers & Hamlins suggests that lack of funders’ interest in operating costs might be one reason why the take up of Building Information Modelling under private finance initiative type schemes has been so slow. More generally, parties are wary of sharing information.

Legislation state of play table
Clyde & Co compile our regular update of the progress of legislation affecting construction as it passes through the UK and EC legislative systems. Nathaniel Horrocks-Burns of Clyde & Co provides a commentary on new sentencing guidelines for health and safety law breaches.

Reports from the courts
Our regular round up of court decisions, from Andrew Croft and Natalie Ledger of Beale & Company, examines a cautionary tale of the dangers of giving informal advice as it may create a tortious duty of care; a court ruling on whether a variation can be agreed by email; and a Scottish case where the court was willing to uphold obligations to provide collateral warranties.

Contracts monitor
Field books might still have a place
Continuing his review of RIBA’s Concise Building Contract 2014, our contracts monitor Michael Phipps, Principal of Thurston Consultants, finds examples of odd wordings and evidence of inadequate text checking.

Exclusion clauses
Courts take broad view on exclusion clauses
Shona Frame of CMS examines exclusion clauses, which recently came under the scrutiny of the courts. These recent decisions suggest that broad interpretations of the losses intended to be excluded are likely to prevail over linguistic arguments as to how particular phrases might be applied in varying circumstances.

Expert witnesses
Do I need an expert?
The courts have discretion in controlling how much, and whether, expert evidence is required or permissible. Barrister Paul Newman of 3PB reviews recent case law that touches upon the question of whether in the opinion of the courts expert evidence is required.

Procurement
Remedies in procurement challenges
Challenges to public sector contract awards are becoming more common, particularly for larger framework type arrangements. Cecily Davis of Fieldfisher looks at recent challenges that reached the courts – could a court order who a contract should be awarded to?

Time at large
What does ‘time at large’ mean?
Barrister Omar Eljadi of Atkin Chambers says the judicial rationale for doubts over whether time is set at large when no extension is awarded might be open to question. A deeper examination of the prevention principle is needed, he argues.

Adjudication
When enthusiasm outweighs common sense
Vijay Bange of Trowers & Hamlins analyses an enforcement of an adjudicator’s decision which highlights that even though an adjudicator is appointed under a contract which later transpires to be the incorrect one, the adjudicator will have jurisdiction if the basis of his appointment remains the same.

Insurance
Beware of indemnity limits
Insurance expert John D Wright of JD Risk Associates warns about the importance of selecting a suitable level of limit on a professional indemnity or public liability policy. Aggregation clauses can mean that the limit is less than thought.

Alternative dispute resolution
Adjudicator’s decision was not predetermined
In our latest alternative dispute resolution series article Russell Banfi of Clyde & Co examines a case that highlights why adjudicators need to be wary of challenges to decisions based on alleged breaches of natural justice.