5 Fundamental Diferences Between U.S. and U.K. Construction Law
Kilpatrick Townsend’s Larry Prosen recently joined other expert panelists at a Washington Building Congress webinar to discuss the topic of “So Close and Yet So Far – Some Fundamental Differences Between U.S. and U.K. Construction Law.” There are similarities, highlighted by substantial differences, between U.S. and U.K. litigation.
Below are just brief highlights of some of these differences– which go much deeper than the following selections:
1. There is a difference between due process in the U.S. arising out of the U.S Constitution and natural law in the U.K., because the U.K. does not have a constitution.
2. The Spearin doctrine recognizes that the owner impliedly warrants the plans and specs versus the U.K. which has a “fitness for purpose” requirement which is less favorable inthat generally a contractor cannot rely upon owner-furnished information.
3. U.S. design liability utilizes a reasonable standard of care as does the U.K. but the U.K. adds a second, more onerous, requirement of the “fitness for purpose” requirement –discussed in the prior takeaway.
4. The U.S. relies heavily on arbitration to resolve construction disputes. While the U.K. also has arbitration it also has a number of other judicial processes and procedures which tend to make disputes more expensive to resolve. This includes items such as crystallization -- this U.K. doctrine states that the parties must give notice, exchange information (there is much more limited discovery in the U.K.), and negotiate before seeking judicial intervention. And then that intervention must be made upon a refined and discreet set ofissues. In contracts, under the doctrine of comprehensive resolution, all disputes arising out of a project or contract can proceed in one overall proceeding.
5. Under the American rule, each party pays its own attorney’s fees and costs absent a contractual or statutory provision to the contrary, or a finding of bad faith. In the U.K., the British rule holds that the loser pays.
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.