Learn more about us:

Featured News

  • Escalating construction costs under FIDIC: is Sub-Clause 13.8 an answer?

    Construction costs are escalating. Under existing contracts, an employer will not want to pay more for the works. But forcing a contractor to perform works that are unprofitable or causing a massive loss is unlikely to be in the best interests of the project. It may result in the insolvency of the contractor forcing the employer to abandon the contract or re-let it, probably at a premium. Is a mechanism for cost adjustment, such as FIDIC 1999 Sub-Clause 13.8 [Adjustments for Changes in Costs], an answer?

    Find out more
  • Price escalation and FIDIC: is Force Majeure an answer?

    Could provisions in FIDIC contracts giving relief for ‘Force Majeure’ or ‘Exceptional Events’ provide relief to contractors suffering as a result of price escalation? It is well documented that construction and engineering projects around the globe are being affected by extreme and sometimes unprecedented price escalation. This is for many reasons including the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russo-Ukrainian conflict.

    Find out more
  • Corbett & Co. Director Joanne Clarke to present MBL Webinar on International Arbitration in Construction & Engineering Disputes – An Introduction

    Corbett & Co. Director Joanne Clarke is presenting an MBL Webinar on International Arbitration in Construction & Engineering Disputes. The webinar will be streamed at 12:30pm on

    Find out more
  • Corbett & Co. ranked highly in Legal 500 2022

    Corbett & Co. has once again been ranked highly in the Legal 500 UK 2022 for its construction expertise. The Legal 500 is one of the leading

    Find out more
  • FIDIC Changes in Legislation and Covid-19: Compelled by Law or Just Doing Your Job?

    Up until the spring of 2020, a FIDIC 1999 Sub-Clause 13.7 [Adjustments for Changes in Legislation][1] claim was just one of many issues to be resolved, for example, in a delay and disruption claim or a Cost claim. However, the focus it receives in the context of Covid-19 is drastically different. Many in the industry are using the changes in legislation provision to seek financial compensation in a situation that would otherwise potentially only attract an extension of time.[2] Awarding Cost for Covid-19 events regardless of the circumstances may seem to some (Contractors mostly, though there are Employers and Engineers who agree) like the appropriate thing to do, but whether it is correct according to the Contract is a different question.

    Find out more
  • The Baby is Back in the Bath: Liquidated Damages in the UK Supreme Court

    In March 2019, in the English Court of Appeal, Sir Rupert Jackson upended the orthodox approach to the operation of liquidated damages clauses in commercial contracts. Sir

    Find out more

Worldwide

Experience includes:

  • Road projects in Poland, Romania, Gibraltar, Albania, Iceland, Macedonia
  • Rail projects in Romania, Bulgaria
  • Building projects in Romania, Gibraltar, Ukraine
  • Waste and water projects in Bulgaria, Croatia, Turkey, Romania
  • Dredging works in Romania, Albania, the Baltic, Southern Europe
  • Energy and power projects in UK, Holland, Gibraltar, Iceland, Serbia, Georgia
  • Airport in Gibraltar
  • Mine project in Spain
  • Consultant Agreement in Georgia

England Focus

Experience includes litigation, arbitration and ADR on:

  • Residential and commercial property claims
  • Energy projects
  • Mechanical and electrical claims
  • Final Accounts and delay claims
  • Advising on professional appointments
  • Advising on contamination of land issues
  • Drafting of construction contracts
  • FIDIC 2017 – First Impressions of the 3-Kilo Suite

    In London last week, FIDIC launched its Second Editions of the Red, Yellow and Silver Books. They are big, weighing in at almost a kilo each. The general conditions cover 106 pages with more than 50,000 words, over 50% longer than the 1999 forms. Many improvements have been made, addressing issues that have emerged since 1999. Fans of Dispute Boards will be pleased to see that all three books now have standing boards with more emphasis on dispute avoidance; and that appointment of DB members and enforcement of their decisions have been made easier. Disputes and Arbitration are now dealt with in a separate chapter 21. Here are the most interesting changes to the Yellow Book.

    Read More
  • A Surprise Award of Third Party Funding Costs

    Third party funding is increasingly used by claimants in international arbitration even though the cost can be significant. To the surprise of many, the English Commercial Court recently held in Essar v. Norscot that a winning claimant could recover from the losing respondent the cost of obtaining third party funding as a cost in the arbitration. So, what exactly is third party funding and what are the implications of Essar v. Norscot for parties involved in international arbitration.

    Read More
  • The Risk of Relying on the Obrascon case’s ruling on Sub-Clause 20.1 Claim Notices

    Contractors are sometimes concerned about the politics of their FIDIC 1999 Sub-Clause 20.1 notices. Some Contractors may consider that serving Sub-Clause 20.1 notices may send the wrong message, particularly in the honeymoon period when the works have just begun. However, the consequences of failing to serve a timely claim notice are so dire that doubtless the issue is regularly on every Contractor’s mind. The case of Obrascon Huarte Lain SA v Her Majesty's Attorney General for Gibraltar1 in the Technology and Construction Court of England and Wales provided some welcomed relief to many Contractors worldwide who may now attempt to rely on its finding on the timing of claim notices when postponing service of these crucial notices.

    Read More

Experience includes:

  • Advising on consultant’s contract in Trinidad
  • Advising on contract conditions in St Maarten
  • Port project in Trinidad
  • Energy projects in Chile & Peru
  • Pier project in the Caribbean

Experience includes:

  • Road projects in Ethiopia, Malawi, Kampala, Uganda
  • Building projects in Libya, Egypt, Sudan
  • Energy and power projects in Uganda, Tunisia, Kenya, Sudan, Tanzania, Egypt, Ethiopia, Rwanda
  • Airport projects in Ethiopia
  • Heavy industrial projects in Egypt, West Africa, Uganda
  • Advising on the call of bonds in Uganda, Rwanda
  • Advising on bonds/guarantee conditions in Zambia, Rwanda
  • Advising on contract conditions in Niger, Armenia, Rwanda
  • Negotiating contract terms on a windfarm in Kenya
  • Port project in Togo
  • Water project in Malawi
  • ICC arbitration against a contractor in relation to the construction of elements of a port in Morocco

Experience includes:

  • Road projects in Vietnam, India, Kyrgyzstan, Malaysia, Ukraine
  • Rail projects in Vietnam
  • Bridge construction in Vietnam
  • Energy and power projects in Laos, Borneo, Indonesia
  • Building projects in Hong Kong, the Seychelles, Malaysia
  • Port projects in India
  • Dredging works in Australia, Bangladesh
  • Advising on a bond in India
  • Advising on contract conditions in Australia
  • Advising on disputes regarding waste water treatment plant in Uzbekistan
  • Hydropower Projects in Pakistan, Nepal
  • Airport project in Nepal
  • Water tunnel project in Nepal

Middle East Focus

  • Energy projects in Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia
  • Port projects in Iraq
  • Rail project in Abu Dhabi
  • Heavy industrial projects in Qatar, Jordan
  • Building projects in Lebanon
  • Advising on construction of a sea wall in Oman
  • Advising on a final account claim in Iran
  • Waterpark project in Abu Dhabi
  • Commercial building projects in Abu Dhabi
  • No EOT for Concurrent Delay, if so Agreed

    Contract clauses that deny a contractor entitlement to an extension of time for concurrent delays caused by both employer and contractor are valid in principle.  In North Midland Building Ltd -V- Cyden Homes Ltd [1] the Court of Appeal of England and Wales has ruled that such clauses do not offend the common law prevention principle.  Nor do they give rise to an implied term to prohibit the imposition of delay damages that may result.

    Read More
  • Arbitration in a Post-Brexit World

    This article considers what the arbitration landscape will look like when (or perhaps if!) the UK leaves the EU and concludes that big changes are unlikely.

    Read More
  • Unjust Enrichment and Construction Contracts – A Cinderella Story?

    Two decades ago, unjust enrichment was described as “the Cinderella of law, barely 10 years old but growing up rapidly. Until recently unrecognised and overshadowed by the ugly sisters, Contract and Tort, Cinderella’s day has arrived.” In England a claim for unjust enrichment was initially referred to as a claim in ‘quasi contract’. This language has now been abandoned and unjust enrichment has a strong foothold in the landscape of commercial law and its role and limits are becoming more clearly defined. Despite this, it is only infrequently pleaded in construction cases and when argued it is often set out in broad terms where the facts do not support such a claim. However, this is cause of action that should not be overlooked by a contractor or employer – especially if they have claims that fall outside the four corners of their construction contract.

    Read More

Experience includes:

  • Road projects in Poland, Romania, Gibraltar, Albania, Iceland, Macedonia
  • Rail projects in Romania, Bulgaria
  • Building projects in Romania, Gibraltar, Ukraine
  • Waste and water projects in Bulgaria, Croatia, Turkey, Romania
  • Dredging works in Romania, Albania, the Baltic, Southern Europe
  • Energy and power projects in UK, Holland, Gibraltar, Iceland, Serbia, Georgia
  • Airport in Gibraltar
  • Mine project in Spain
  • Consultant Agreement in Georgia

England Focus

Experience includes litigation, arbitration and ADR on:

  • Residential and commercial property claims
  • Energy projects
  • Mechanical and electrical claims
  • Final Accounts and delay claims
  • Advising on professional appointments
  • Advising on contamination of land issues
  • Drafting of construction contracts

Experience includes:

  • Advising on consultant’s contract in Trinidad
  • Advising on contract conditions in St Maarten
  • Port project in Trinidad
  • Energy projects in Chile & Peru
  • Pier project in the Caribbean

Experience includes:

  • Road projects in Ethiopia, Malawi, Kampala, Uganda
  • Building projects in Libya, Egypt, Sudan
  • Energy and power projects in Uganda, Tunisia, Kenya, Sudan, Tanzania, Egypt, Ethiopia, Rwanda
  • Airport projects in Ethiopia
  • Heavy industrial projects in Egypt, West Africa, Uganda
  • Advising on the call of bonds in Uganda, Rwanda
  • Advising on bonds/guarantee conditions in Zambia, Rwanda
  • Advising on contract conditions in Niger, Armenia, Rwanda
  • Negotiating contract terms on a windfarm in Kenya
  • Port project in Togo
  • Water project in Malawi
  • ICC arbitration against a contractor in relation to the construction of elements of a port in Morocco

Experience includes:

  • Road projects in Vietnam, India, Kyrgyzstan, Malaysia, Ukraine
  • Rail projects in Vietnam
  • Bridge construction in Vietnam
  • Energy and power projects in Laos, Borneo, Indonesia
  • Building projects in Hong Kong, the Seychelles, Malaysia
  • Port projects in India
  • Dredging works in Australia, Bangladesh
  • Advising on a bond in India
  • Advising on contract conditions in Australia
  • Advising on disputes regarding waste water treatment plant in Uzbekistan
  • Hydropower Projects in Pakistan, Nepal
  • Airport project in Nepal
  • Water tunnel project in Nepal

Middle East Focus

  • Energy projects in Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia
  • Port projects in Iraq
  • Rail project in Abu Dhabi
  • Heavy industrial projects in Qatar, Jordan
  • Building projects in Lebanon
  • Advising on construction of a sea wall in Oman
  • Advising on a final account claim in Iran
  • Waterpark project in Abu Dhabi
  • Commercial building projects in Abu Dhabi

Meet the team

Managing Director

Director

Director

Counsel

See the full Corbett & Co. Team

Insights

  • Damages at Large: Triple Point, FIDIC and the TCC

    Triple Point Technology, Inc v PTT Public Company Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 230 Triple Point Technology, Inc v PTT Public Company Ltd [2017] EWHC 2178 (TCC) PBS Energo AS v Bester Generacion UK Ltd and

    Read More
  • FIDIC’s Emerald Book – A contractor’s charter or optimum risk allocation?

    It has been suggested that FIDIC’s new Emerald Book may be “a contractors’ charter for riches”. 1 This article examines whether this new form of contract for underground works by FIDIC and the International Tunnelling and Underground Space Association is too contractor-biased or whether it provides a sensible and pragmatic risk allocation process, in an area of construction and engineering which is well known for claims. If more risks are placed on the Employer in this form of contract, what are the benefits of the contract compared to, for example, an unamended FIDIC Yellow Book?

    Read More
  • Africa

    Experience includes: Road projects in Ethiopia, Malawi, Kampala, Uganda Building projects in Libya, Egypt, Sudan Energy and power projects in Uganda, Tunisia, Kenya, Sudan, Tanzania, Egypt, Ethiopia, Rwanda Airport projects in Ethiopia Heavy industrial projects

    Read More
  • No Oral Modification Clauses Mean What They Say

    Will an oral agreement override a written one that expressly prohibits oral modification?  No.  The UK Supreme Court in Rock Advertising Ltd - v - MWB Business Exchange Centres Ltd[1] brings welcome clarification to the English common law on “no oral modification” (NOM) clauses.  The courts will now uphold them. 

    Read More
  • No EOT for Concurrent Delay, if so Agreed

    Contract clauses that deny a contractor entitlement to an extension of time for concurrent delays caused by both employer and contractor are valid in principle.  In North Midland Building Ltd -V- Cyden Homes Ltd [1] the Court of Appeal of England and Wales has ruled that such clauses do not offend the common law prevention principle.  Nor do they give rise to an implied term to prohibit the imposition of delay damages that may result.

    Read More
  • Arbitration in a Post-Brexit World

    This article considers what the arbitration landscape will look like when (or perhaps if!) the UK leaves the EU and concludes that big changes are unlikely.

    Read More
  • FIDIC 1999 Books – Commentary on Clause 6

    Clause 6 deals with Staff and Labour. These provisions need to be read with the applicable laws where the works are being carried out or the relevant employment law if different. Sub-Clause 6.1 commits the Contractor (unless otherwise specified) to pay for his staff and their housing feeding and transport. Sub-Clause 6.2 requires the Contractor not to pay lower wages or give lower conditions than those generally applicable locally. Sub-Clause 6.3 forbids the Contractor from attempting to recruit from the Employer’s Personnel. Sub-Clause 6.4 requires the Contractor to abide by labour laws and to require his staff to obey the law generally. Sub-Clause 6.5 forbids work on locally recognised rest days or outside the working hours set out in the Appendix to Tender, unless stated in the Contract or agreed to by the Engineer or essential for the protection of life or property or for safety reasons. Sub-Clause 6.6 requires the Contractor to provide and maintain all necessary accommodation for its personnel and for the Employer’s personnel to the extent stated in the Specification. It is forbidden from permitting its own Personnel from living within the structures forming part of the Permanent Works. Sub-Clause 6.7 requires the Contractor to maintain the health and safety of its personnel and maintain proper medical facilities for its own personnel and for any Employer Personnel accommodated. It is required to appoint an accident prevention officer. It is required to notify the Employer of any accidents and maintain records. Sub-Clause 6.8 requires the Contractor to provide all necessary superintendence by a sufficient number of properly qualified people with adequate knowledge of the defined language of communications. Sub-Clause 6.9 requires the Contractor to ensure that its personnel are properly qualified, skilled and experienced. The Employer may require the Contractor to remove any person employed on the Site or the Works who commits misconduct, is incompetent or negligent, fails to perform in accordance with any provision of the Contract or persists in any conduct prejudicial to health, safety or the environment. If a person is removed the Contractor will have to replace him. Sub-Clause 6.10 requires the Contractor to submit to the Engineer details showing personnel and equipment on Site. This is required each month and must be in a form approved by the Engineer. Sub-Clause 6.11 requires the Contractor to take reasonable precautions to prevent disorderly conduct by Contractor’s Personnel and to preserve the peace and protection or nearby persons and property.

    Read More
  • Cherry Picking FIDIC 2017

    Much has been said about the new Red, Yellow and Silver Books 2nd Editions launched by FIDIC in December last year. The most obvious comment has been about their size, almost 50,000 words, which is some 60% longer than the 1999 forms. Although the 1999 forms were not perfect, most regular users seem to be agreed that they did not need 20,000 words to fix the issues. This consensus led this author to attempt to cherry-pick the good bits from the 2017 forms and to propose amendments to add the good ideas to the 1999 forms. The amendments apply to all three forms unless it is indicated otherwise.

    Read More