Cookies on Pinsent Masons website

Our website uses cookies and similar technologies to allow us to promote our services and enhance your browsing experience. If you continue to use our website you agree to our use of cookies.

To understand more about how we use cookies, or for information on how to change your cookie settings, please see our Cookie Policy.

Construction Litigation

Deciding when to litigate is in itself a skill. Today, our advisory and disputes lawyers spend much of their time working with clients to avoid disputes. Adjudication, arbitration, mediation, ADR, dispute review boards, expert determination and conciliations are all tools we can apply expertly on your behalf before costly litigation. We won’t put you in the High Court unless it’s absolutely necessary. Then you’ll be in the best hands.

Key Contacts

Other key Construction Litigation contacts

Consistently ranked No. 1 by legal directories over many years, a number of our construction disputes group are also qualified engineers, architects and surveyors.  We understand your business and your marketplace.  Several of our construction partners are also accredited mediators, providing us with a valuable insight into the mechanics of the process.  We have an unrivalled reputation for representing parties in substantial and highly complex adjudications, including enforcing and/or challenging adjudicator decisions in the technology and construction courts.  We have acted in very many of construction laws leading cases from Alfred McAlpine vs Panatown to Balfour Beatty vs Chestermount to City Inn vs Shepherd to name but a few.

Case examples

  1. Injunction. When one joint venture partner on a major infrastructure project refused to authorise payments from the JV bank account to the other JV partner, we successfully obtained an injunction requiring the sums to be paid out.
  2. Enforcing an adjudicator's award.   The opposing party refused to pay the sums awarded because the adjudicator had a made an obvious mistake in his calculations.  We enforced the decision in the UK Court of Appeal which decided the court would not interfere where an adjudicator had answered the question put to him, thereby acting within his jurisdiction, but had answered the question in the wrong way.
  3. Freezing order.  Having seen our client's claims and evidence, the other party in adjudication started to move its assets out of the jurisdiction.  We obtained a Freezing Order preventing these transfers, pending the Adjudicator's decision.
  4. Claim for additional construction cost.  We successfully claimed significant sums resulting from disruption and prolongation caused by design changes made late in the project.
  5. Resisting enforcement of an adjudicator's decision.  A contractor referred the grant of an extension of time to an adjudicator before the Architect had made his decision.  We successfully argued that there could be no dispute to refer to adjudication until the Architect had had an opportunity to make his decision as required by the mechanism in the contract.
  6. Bond call.  We successfully resisted an application to freeze a bond call where a claim of fraud had been made and in which the UK Court considered the manner in which it should exercise its powers under Section 44 of the Arbitration Act.
  7. Claim for damages.  We successfully represented a contractor in its claim against the supplier of two oil tanker vessels for conversion to the P43 and P48 FPSO vessels.