Citation: [2025] EWHC 594 (TCC)
The court interpreted the provisions of a JCT Design and Build Contract 2016 to determine where the existing structure risk fell.
Background
Sisk and C&C entered into a JCT Design and Build Contract 2016 for works at Weir Mill, Stockport. Sisk was the contractor; C&C was the employer. Clause 2.42 allocated risks relating to the site and existing structures to Sisk, subject to Item 2 of the 'Contract Clarifications'. Item 2 of the Contract Clarifications stated that the Employer was to insure the existing buildings/works and to obtain a warranty with regard to the suitability of the proposed works. A dispute arose as to whether the existing structures risk was allocated to Sisk or C&C under the contract. An adjudicator had previously found that it was Sisk’s.
Sisk argued that item 2 of the Contract Clarifications designated the existing structures risk, including ability to support the works, as the 'Employer Risk' – i.e., C&C. C&C argued that the Tender Submission Clarifications document, which was part of the contract, showed Sisk had agreed to take the existing structures risk subject to C&C providing insurance under Option C.
Decision (HHJ Stephen Davies)
The court ruled in favour of Sisk, holding that under the proper construction of the contract, the risk of unsuitability of the existing structures, including their ability to support and facilitate the proposed works, lay solely with C&C as the employer. The words “employer risk” when read against the column heading and Sisk’s contract clarification, suggested that this was the proper interpretation.
Representation
Simon Hargreaves KC (Keating Chambers) for the Claimant, instructed by Gowling WLG (UK) LLP, Birmingham.
Abdul Jinadu (Keating Chambers) for the Defendant, instructed by Excello Law Limited, Solicitors, Manchester.
The judgment can be found here.
