Patrick Holmes
CommentThe shape of things to come
The judgment in a recent asbestos case could have dramatic benefits for firms in the construction industry - if the courts choose to apply its logic to them
CommentGo back to square one
The law dealing with negligence and defective buildings is a mess, and every time the courts look at it, they make things worse. We need to start again 鈥�
CommentImperfectly formed
The Law Commission plans to offer more protection to small businesses. Fine in principle 鈥� unless it allows small firms to exploit large loopholes
CommentAnyone for tort?
The law of negligence underpins the legal system. It is therefore just a teeny bit disturbing that the courts can鈥檛 seem to decide what it says or who it applies to
CommentIt鈥檚 bad news, I鈥檓 afraid
Project managers and clients beware: under certain circumstances, you may fall under the Inland Revenue鈥檚 CIS scheme 鈥� with unpleasant consequences
- Comment
Lucky mistakes
If your client happens to benefit from your negligence, can you offset that benefit from any damages you owe? This is what the court had to say
- Comment
More poor SAPS
You may remember the case of the boilers that weren't of satisfactory quality despite being in perfect working order. Well, the argument's heating up鈥�
- Comment
Guilt-free lawyer-lite
Taken a vow of abstinence? Girding yourself for the rigours of rapid detox? The lawyers among you should turn your attention some to some proper resolutions
- Comment
Stay on the ball
This case demonstrates, once again, the importance of tatooing any amendments you make to a standard form on a readily visible part of your body
- Comment
Over their dead bodies
If a consultant makes a mess of your project and then goes belly-up, can you claim on its professional indemnity insurance? This is what happened to Galliford
- Comment
Let the seller beware
Another housing project more or less finished, so it's pints all round while we wait for the money. Sadly, new mortgage rules mean it may be a long wait 鈥�
- Comment
Words of warning
Consultants who rely on net contribution clauses in their terms of appointment may not have the protection that they think they do. Here's why 鈥�
- Comment
The great unknown
Not knowing the law used to be no excuse for anything. But now the courts are telling us that it can be a helpful point to raise in a contractual dispute
- Comment
The moral law
A little-known fact is that architects have the same 'moral' rights over their buildings as writers have over their novels. But what does that mean for the practice?
- Comment
Suit yourself
You don't have to go bespoke to get a contract that suits. A nip here, a cut-and-paste clause there, can keep everyone happy. Just be careful with the scissors
- Comment
Looking on the dark side
Patrick Holmes聽- Stock market dives have sparked fears of recession. So, if the economy does turn down, who's going to lose out? And what can they do about it?
- Features
One rule for them …
If a contractor is late, it gets thumped with liquidated damages. If a consultant is late, it’s difficult to do anything at all. So, perhaps we should make both subject to the same rules. But which ones?
- Features
Empty life of a very fine chair
Introducing fitness-for-purpose obligations into contracts in place of reasonable-skill-and-care clauses would remove uncertainty and reduce disputes, but perhaps we’d have to pay more for peace of mind.