Removing the incentive for written contracts is madness
Language: English Series: Construction News ; (7029) 2 August 2007, 28(1)Publication details: 2007Subject(s): Summary: Debates one of the proposed changes to the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 as set out in government's latest consultation (L138559). The proposed change will mean the 1996 Act will apply to any construction contract, whether written or oral, or partly written and partly oral. Argues that this will remove an incentive to get an agreement in writing and that adjudication is not a suitable method of resolving disputes over oral agreements. Concludes that the 1996 Act works well enough in its current form and amending s107 could lead to a mass of litigation cases.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | L139768 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 139768-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
Debates one of the proposed changes to the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 as set out in government's latest consultation (L138559). The proposed change will mean the 1996 Act will apply to any construction contract, whether written or oral, or partly written and partly oral. Argues that this will remove an incentive to get an agreement in writing and that adjudication is not a suitable method of resolving disputes over oral agreements. Concludes that the 1996 Act works well enough in its current form and amending s107 could lead to a mass of litigation cases.