UK: Projects And Construction Law Update - May 6, 2015

Please see below Clyde & Co's latest projects and construction law update - a regular review aimed at providing up-to-date information for those in the construction and infrastructure industry.

We look at industry news as well as recent court decisions concerning:

  • a disputed call on a bond
  • a refusal to imply a duty of good faith where there was no exercise of a contractual discretion
  • the effect of an arbitration provision in a standard form in an insolvency set-off situation
  • the 'modern approach' to penalty clauses


HSE publishes final CDM 2015 guidance

The HSE has published the final version of its guidance on the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015, which supersedes the draft guidance published in January. The Approved Code of Practice (ACOP) for the previous regulations has now been withdrawn and as yet no new ACOP has been published for CDM 2015.

Parties are therefore advised to refer to the guidance when interpreting CDM 2015. The HSE has stated that following the guidance is not mandatory, but parties who do so will normally be doing enough to comply with the law. A free copy may be downloaded here.

New practice note on the electronic working TCC pilot practice direction

A pilot of a new electronic working system is to start on 11 May 2015 (postponed from 27 April 2015) in the Technology and Construction Courts (TCC) within the Rolls Building in London. A new practice direction, PD 51J, which came into force on 6 April 2015, prescribes the procedure to be followed when using the pilot for "Electronic Working" and was part of the 79th CPR update practice direction amendments. Proceedings may be started, and all subsequent steps taken, using Electronic Working.

The potential benefits of Electronic Working include the ability to file documents at court 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and to receive an automatic acknowledgment of the document's submission, although there is a 10MB limit on documents which may be filed. The TCC is anxious for practitioners to take part in the pilot, which it appears will run until the system is introduced in other Rolls Building courts from September 2015. There is an online survey to provide feedback.

Commission launches consultation on remedies in public procurement

On 24 April 2015, the European Commission launched a consultation to evaluate the effectiveness of Directive 2007/66 on public procurement remedies. Directive 2007/66 substantially amended Directive 89/665 (the public sector Remedies Directive) and Directive 92/13 (the utilities Remedies Directive).

There is an online questionnaire which asks whether the Remedies Directives (as amended by Directive 2007/66) have improved the public procurement process, and which are the most relevant provisions. It also asks for certain information about review procedures (duration and the standard of review).

The Commission also seeks views on whether the modified Remedies Directive is sufficiently clear and precise, and whether the balance of interests protected is appropriate. Other topics covered by the consultation include effectiveness of interim measures, the standstill period, and penalties and damages. As well as seeking information on how the directive operates at national level (for example court costs, admin charges etc) the Commission requests views on whether there are still problems in addressing breaches in EU public procurement law.

The Commission is keen for participants to respond, and the deadline for responding to this consultation is 20 July 2015.


MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd and another v Biffa Waste Services Ltd [2015] EWHC 949 (TCC)

This case involved a temporary injunction granted by Mr Justice Stuart-Smith preventing a call on a retention bond. The defendant, Biffa, entered into an EPC contract with the claimant, MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd (MW), for the design and construction of a waste treatment plant. Under the contract MW were obliged to procure a retention bond. It was a condition precedent to calling on the bond that the employer must first make a call on the Parent Company Guarantee (PCG), also provided by MW. After the contract was terminated, Biffa made a call on the PCG, claiming for the costs of completing the works, and LDs which were owed. After no payment under the PCG was forthcoming, Biffa then called on the retention bond. M&W rejected the call, and applied to the court for Biffa to be restrained from calling the bond on the basis the call on the PCG was not valid. The court considered various authorities, noting that the court will not intervene in a call on a bond except in two cases: (1) where there is obvious fraud known to the bank and (2) where the call is precluded by the underlying terms of the contract. In the absence of fraud the court found there was no justification for implying a term that the call on the PCG should be "valid", and that such an approach would encourage satellite litigation and subvert the normal approach of on-demand bonds: "pay now, argue later." Accordingly there were no grounds upon which the call on the bond could be restrained.

To view the full text of the decision, please click here.

Myers v Kestrel Acquisitions [2015] EWHC 916 (Ch)

Here the High Court refused to imply a term that a party would act in good faith in the context of the right to amend a loan note. A duty of good faith will normally be implied where a party is exercising a contractual discretion. The defendant, Kestrel, had issued vendor loan notes (VLNs) to the claimant, Myers, as part consideration for the sale of its sub-prime lending business. It was a term of the VLNs that Kestrel could make modifications to them. When Kestrel subsequently purported to amend the VLNs, Myers objected on the basis that the amendments would render the VLNs worthless. Consequently they asked the court to imply a term that any modification to the VLNs had to be made in good faith. The court refused on the basis that exercise of the right to amend was a "binary choice" based on a simple decision as to whether or not to exercise the contractual right to amend, and did not involve a discretion arising from a range of options. The case confirms that the English court continues to be reluctant to imply good faith obligations unless a discretion is being exercised.

To view the full text of the decision, please click here.

Philpott and another v Lycee Francais Charles De Gaulle School [2015] EWHC 1065 (Ch)

In this case the High Court considered whether the arbitration clause contained in a JCT contract bound liquidators who were seeking to sue the debtor for an insolvency set-off balance. The case involved an insolvent contractor, WGL, which had carried out works for the defendant school (the Lycee) under a JCT Intermediate form 2005 Revision 1: 2007 (the contract). The disputed final account either meant £615,000 was due to WGL, or £270,000 was due to the Lycee. The parties came before the court for determination of how the dispute should be resolved, as the only remaining debt following the liquidation was the net balance under the contract. The Lycee contended that the liquidators could not bring court proceedings under the Insolvency Rules due to the arbitration clause in the contract. The judge decided that, because there were claims on both sides, these could only be resolved by initiating formal proceedings, and that any legal proceedings would automatically be stayed by operation of section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996, which provides for a mandatory stay of court proceedings if the parties have an agreement to arbitrate. The judge further found that it was open to the parties to adjudicate the dispute, although this would result in a temporary resolution only and therefore would not make much practical or commercial sense.

To view the full text of the decision, please click here.

ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] EWCA Civ 402

In this case the Court of Appeal considered the law of penalties in connection with a parking fine. A motorist received an £85 fine for overstaying the free parking period in a car park. There was no dispute that he had overstayed, but the imposition of the charge (which was advertised on a number of signs in the car park) was rejected on the basis that it was unenforceable as a penalty. The case was assigned to the regional civil judge because it involved a point of principle that would affect other claims. The judge found that the motorist, in parking in the car park had done so on the terms of the parking signs, and thus entered into a contract which included an agreement to pay the notified charge for overstaying. The judge noted the charge had the quality of a penalty but held that it was commercially justifiable because it was neither "improper in purpose" nor "manifestly excessive" in its amount. The motorist appealed to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal considered (1) whether the charge was unenforceable as a penalty and (2) was it unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UTCCR). The Court of Appeal went through the recent developments in the law of penalties, culminating in the El Makdessi case. Although the authorities all considered commercial transactions Moore-Bick LJ considered that the underlying principle, as to whether the payment was extravagant and unconscionable, could still be applied as a basis on which to decide whether or not to enforce the contract. The first instance judge had held that the proper "modern approach" required consideration of the clause from a number of different perspectives including proportionality to the actual loss, deterrence and commercial justification, and Moore-Bick LJ concurred. He found that unless the charge was 'grossly unreasonable' it was hard to see a basis for treating it as unenforceable, and due consideration also had to be given to the fact that a mechanism was required to ensure the short stay free parking provision was not abused. Having found it was enforceable at common law, the UCCTR were applied. The court found that the arrangement was not unfair nor did it cause a significant imbalance. The judgment thus confirms that penalties which are deterrent in their nature may still be enforced if they are not "extravagant or unconscionable".

To view the full text of the decision, please click here.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions