All Comment articles 鈥� Page 663
-
CommentFall-out shelter
Will we ever have an industry in which well-run subcontractors do not continually face financial ruin because they happen to work for a contractor that goes bust?
-
CommentException to the rule
If you win a case against a limited company that goes bust usually you can鈥檛 pursue the owners for costs. But in this case that鈥檚 exactly what did happen 鈥�
-
Comment
Not so disastrous?
After 星空传媒 put its foot in it with the 10 鈥榙isastrous鈥� building projects, our readers kick back
-
Comment
Behind the statistics
I was disappointed that your magazine chose to publish the PPP Forum鈥檚 inaccurate and misleading account of the evidence for PFI.
-
Comment
Biting back
The Latham review into payment provisions under the Construction Act recommends removing the need for a payer鈥檚 notice. In fact, what it really needs is more teeth
-
CommentThe value of values
Just like in any job interview, first (and second and third) impressions count with your clients. It鈥檚 crucial that your customers can see what you stand for
-
Comment
Who do you think you are?
If you are signing a contract as part of a consortium, it鈥檚 vital to identify all of the contracting parties. A recent case reveals the dangers of not doing so
-
Comment
Sub standards
The time of the year has once again passed when chartered surveyors look at the subscription demands and wonder why they remain members of the RICS (answers on a postcard 鈥� I can鈥檛 fathom it).
-
Comment
Lost in translation
Bellwater SL: There was no alliance(Re: Skansen article, 4 February, page 19) A few days after we met in Madrid, Chris Seeley [of Skansen Interiors] wrote to me wishing us luck in the future as an independent company. In the meeting, I had informed both Chris Seeley and Patrick Lucas-Box, ...
-
-
Comment
No more heroes, please
I am writing to comment on an advertisement in the 28 January issue (page 66). Under the banner 鈥淯nsung heroes鈥�, there is a picture of a worker sitting high in the air on a steel beam. From the picture there is no clear means of fall protection, although he is ...
-
-
CommentStop having fun
In Scotland, parties can no longer indulge in games of ambushing courts with fresh evidence. An eminently sensible idea, and one that should apply to adjudication
-
CommentNo quick fix
Reports that Lafarge may have supplied faulty cement raise a host of problems for suppliers and contractors that face legal claims 鈥� or want to pass them on
-
Comment
A federal feud
Colin Harding (Letters, 11 February, page 39) is often blunt but always, in my opinion, right in his criticism of our industry鈥檚 federations and the plight in which we 鈥渟mall builders鈥� constantly find ourselves.
-
CommentFat-cat scapegoats
The public appetite for tougher corporate killing penalties is being fed by a private member鈥檚 bill 鈥� which excludes the government from its scope
-
CommentJust not good enough
What verdict should the Health and Safety Executive pass on the construction industry at next week鈥檚 summit?
-
Comment
Disputing a dispute
The parties had entered into a contract incorporating the ICE conditions, 5th Edition, and the engineer had made a decision in relation to a dispute pursuant to clause 66 of those conditions.
-
Comment
Show your clause
The claimant contractor sought to enforce the decision of an adjudicator made in its favour. The defendant refused to pay on the basis that the adjudicator did not have any jurisdiction to hear the dispute, because there was no construction contract incorporating adjudication provisions. The dispute related to work carried ...
-
CommentA century of stasis
If Prescott really wants to make a difference to the housing market, then the bar for his 拢60,000 home challenge needs to be set as high as a similar scheme in 1905