This issue opens with an article by Mr Ralph Busch of White & Case LLP, Düsseldorf, entitled “Construction Contracts for Offshore Wind Farms” (at page 426). The paper is timely as there has been an increase both in offshore wind farm construction internationally and in related disputes. The author has adopted a comprehensive “cradle to grave” approach to his analysis of wind farm projects, dealing with all the relevant issues from both a commercial and legal perspective. The paper examines important “front end” construction issues such as contractual risk allocation and construction management for offshore wind farm projects before moving to an assessment of practical aspects of offshore construction. Such aspects include the use and procurement of vessels and the risks and challenges associated with adverse weather, which form the bulk of the risk profile of any offshore project. The paper concludes with useful recommendations for the drafting of wind farm contracts. Most importantly, the author provides a valuable insight into questions of apportionment and limitation of liability, dispute resolution, and the existence of power curve warranties – an issue unique to wind farm projects whereby a specific energy output for various wind speeds is warranted. The author covers the position in a number of jurisdictions, including the UK, France, Belgium and Germany.

Our second paper is “Abnormally Low Tenders: Making Dectection Objective” (at page 460) by Ir Antonios Megremis. We are grateful to the author for this summary of an extensive study that he undertook which has been very well received. Drawing from experience in the European Union, the author maps out a useful framework for identifying Abnormally Low Tenders (ALTs), which are frequently cited as the cause of failed partnering, poor quality and disputes. In the EU the procedure for rejecting ALTs is regulated by EU Directives on public procurement, yet what constitutes an ALT is not defined by them. In covering the issue of identifying ALTs, the author looks at recent cases in the European Court of Justice and elsewhere, as well as considering integrated contracts and improvements in procurement procedures. Taking account of the benefit of having a unified standard in legislation but with flexibility to deal with specific projects, the framework proposed in the paper sets out a consistent, objective and legally sound solution to the problem of ALTs.

Another study follows (at page 479). Dr Oveis Rezvanian writes about opinions of construction professionals: “Evaluative Study of Construction ADR Methods and Attitudes of Professionals”. The study derives from part of the author’s research for his doctoral thesis. He conducted an industry-wide questionnaire to elicit answers from respondents in a wide range of nationalities and jurisdictions. The respondents were selected for their extensive experience, and the research was evidently conducted in accordance with rigorous methodology. The author’s study is based on a