Worst case scenario: anticipating contractor insolvency - lessons from recent cases
Series: Construction Law Journal ; 20(2) 2004, 58-70(13)Publication details: 2004Subject(s):- COSLETT (CONTRACTORS) LTD'S ADMINISTRATOR V BRIDGEND BC
- ACTIONSTRENGTH LTD V INTERNATIONAL GLASS ENGINEERING INGL EN SPA AND ANOTHER
- INSOLVENCY ACT 1986
- BRITISH EAGLE V AIR FRANCE
- RE WILKINSON EX P FOWLER
- RE TOUT AND FINCH LTD
- MULLAN & SONS (CONTRACTORS) LIMITED V ROSS AND ANOTHER
- HOUSING GRANTS, CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996
- PALMERS LTD V A B B POWER CONSTRUCTION LTD
- STRATHMORE BUILDING SERVICES LTD V COLIN SCOTT GREIG
- CASH FLOW
- Insolvency
- BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION-CONTRACTS
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS67687 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 126057-1001 |
Comments on recent case law as part of the contractor insolvency process. Highlights that one of the client's main concerns, in the event of contractor insolvency, will be getting the job finished. Clauses in most UK construction and engineering contracts generally make provision for this eventuality. This often takes the form of making provision to give the employer rights over the contractor's plant, including the right to use it to complete the contract and to sell it. Problems arise if these provisions fail, as in "Coslett (Contractors) Ltd's Administrator v Bridgend BC" ([2001] UKHL 58, [2002] IAC 336). Cash-flow problems can also result when a contractor fails, as in "Actionstrength Ltd v International Glass Engineering INGL EN SpA and another" ([2003] UKHL 17, Abs66760)