Tort for construction lawyers

The general law of contract and the law of tort are central elements of construction law. The principles of tort examined in this subtopic therefore underpin the construction law topics that are covered in Construction and, for construction lawyers, present an additional set of considerations and risks.

A ‘tort’ is a civil wrong that occurs where someone unfairly causes another person to suffer loss or harm.

A person committing a tort is legally liable to the party injured, who is provided with a remedy in law, such as monetary damages or an injunction to compel or prevent certain conduct. An injured party who decides to pursue the matter in court is known as the claimant, and the person alleged to be responsible for the damage is the defendant or tortfeasor.

In the context of a construction project, tortious liability can arise in a number of different ways. This sub-topic examines the most common form of tort law, negligence, and breach of statutory duty. It also considers

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Construction News

MHCLG publishes translated versions of response to Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 report

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has published translated versions of the executive summary and chapter one of its response to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry's Phase 2 report. These translations are available in eleven languages, including Amharic, Arabic, Farsi, Italian, Portuguese, Somali, Spanish, Tagalog, Tigrinya, Urdu, and Vietnamese.

MHCLG publishes Circular 01/2025 on amendments to Approved Document B (Fire Safety)

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has published Circular 01/2025, along with an accompanying letter, announcing the withdrawal and replacement of Approved Document B (Fire Safety) Volumes 1 and 2: 2019 edition incorporating 2020 and 2022 amendments collated with 2025, 2026, and 2029 amendments. The circular details where changes have been made to correct typographical errors. MHCLG has confirmed that these corrections do not alter the underlying policy intent, implementation schedule, or transitional provisions. These changes took effect on 2 March 2025.

Court finds it has power to determine Arbitral Tribunal’s jurisdiction (Barclays Bank plc v VEB RF)

Arbitration analysis: The London Circuit Commercial Court (LCCC) made a rare finding that it was able to determine whether an arbitral tribunal had jurisdiction to hear a dispute under an arbitration agreement, in an application made pursuant to section 32(2) of the Arbitration Act 1996 (Arbitration Act). The underlying dispute concerned a currency swap agreement between Barclays Bank plc (Barclays) and VEB.RF (VEB), in which Barclays claimed it was lawfully unable to pay a sum that would otherwise be due and owing to VEB under the contract as VEB had been sanctioned. After VEB commenced court proceedings in Russia against Barclays, Barclays obtained an anti-suit injunction (ASI) preventing the dispute from being heard otherwise than by LCIA Arbitration, pursuant to the terms of the parties’ arbitration agreement. Barclays later sought to amend the ASI to allow the dispute to be heard in the LCCC, arguing that the arbitral tribunal had no jurisdiction because Barclays had exercised its contractual right to require the dispute to be heard by the courts. Written by Tatiana Minaeva, partner, and Ana Margetts, associate, at RPC.

Retention of title clauses, section 49(2) SGA 1979 and contractual estoppel in guarantee claims (CE Energy v Bashar & another)

Commercial analysis: This is an important decision as to a seller’s ability to claim in debt for the price of unpaid goods notwithstanding a retention of title provision in the contract of sale. The judgment contains a useful analysis as to the requirement, in section 49(2) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (SGA 1979), for a price to be payable on ‘a day certain irrespective of delivery’, confirming that a wide interpretation should be adopted. The case also contains guidance as to construing guarantees and the operation and effect of the doctrine of contractual estoppel. Written by Nicola Allsop, barrister at Quadrant Chambers.