According to research published on 20 September 2010, by TheCityUK’s legal services and dispute resolution group, the use of arbitration and mediation in the UK has risen dramatically - almost certainly as a consequence of the current financial crisis. Our 14th Review therefore looks at the revised TCC Court Guide which came into effect at the beginning of October 2010. One of the new features of the Guide is that it specifically recognises the possibility of introducing the expert hot tub to trials, so naturally enough we investigate just what that is all about. The TCC Guide also stresses the importance of mediation and we summarise the findings of the 2010 report entitled “Mediating Construction Disputes” carried out by a Fenwick Elliott-led team.
There are plenty more articles for your consideration, the links to which are below or you can download a PDF of the full Review by completing the “Download our Annual Review” form. If you would like a hard copy of this Annual Review, please contact Jeremy Glover [1] with your name, company name, address and email.
Mediating Construction Disputes – An Evaluation of Existing Practice [3]
Expert evidence – hot tubbing [4]
Latest developments in adjudication - insolvency [5]
Alternatives to adjudication: Part 8 proceedings [6]
The continued rise of time bars? [7]
Assessing claims for extensions of time and disruption: concurrency and apportionment [8]
Look before you leap - pre-contract safeguards [9]
Challenging the tender process: documents and disclosure [10]
The 2010 Bribery Act [11]
The new FIDIC sub-contract [12]
FIDIC: recoverability of “cost” [13]
International arbitration - case law update [14]
The continued rise of the NEC3 [15]
The RIBA Agreements 2010: are we there yet? [16]
Links
[1] mailto:jglover@fenwickelliott.com
[2] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/changes-tcc
[3] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/mediating-construction-disputes
[4] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/expert-evidence-hot-tubbing
[5] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/developments-adjudication-insolvency
[6] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/alternatives-adjudication
[7] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/rise-time-bars
[8] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/assessing-claims-extensions-time-disruption-concurrency-apportionment
[9] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/pre-contract-safeguards
[10] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/documents-disclosure
[11] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/2010-bribery-act
[12] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/fidic-sub-contract
[13] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/fidic-recoverability-cost
[14] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/international-arbitration-case-law
[15] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/continued-rise-nec3
[16] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/2010/riba-agreements-2010
[17] http://fenwickelliott.uk/research-insight/annual-review/archive