International Construction Law Review
CORRESPONDENT’S REPORT – UK – PART 2: CASE REPORTS
NICHOLAS DOWNING, PARTNER
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
IAIN SUTTIE, SENIOR ASSOCIATE
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
EMILY BLANSHARD, SENIOR ASSOCIATE
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
SUSANNAH DAVIS, PROFESSIONAL SUPPORT LAWYER
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
NOE MINAMIKATA, PROFESSIONAL SUPPORT LAWYER
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
INTRODUCTION
Since our last UK Correspondent’s Report in 2019, there have been a number of notable cases concerning the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (the “1996 Act”) in which the Technology and Construction Court has provided important judicial clarification around the application of the 1996 Act, including on the exclusions to the definition of “construction operations”. Most notably, however, 2020 saw a conclusive determination regarding the much debated interrelationship between statutory adjudication under the 1996 Act and the UK insolvency regime in the form of the Supreme Court’s judgment in Bresco Electrical Services Ltd (In Liquidation) v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd [2020] UKSC 25; [2020] BLR 497. More recently, the Supreme Court also handed down its long-awaited decision in Triple Point Technology Inc v PTT Public Company Ltd [2021] UKSC 29; [2021] 3 WLR 521 in which it overturned the Court of Appeal’s “radical re-interpretation of the case law on liquidated damages”.1
496