Meet the Co-chairs - TAGLAW

Rintoul, David
Clarkslegal LLP

Mead, Patrick
Carter Newell


Contact: Gregory P. Cafouros; Kroger, Gardis & Regas, LLP (Indianapolis, Indiana, USA)

Architects and Engineers benefit from a rule in construction known as The Economic Loss Doctrine, limiting a design professional’s exposure in construction claims. The players in a construction project dispute are required to follow the “chain of contracts” that the owner, construction manager, general contractor, subcontractors and design professionals signed before beginning their work.

Read more: All Puffed Up…Proposals Can Bite Back

In the Q4 2015 edition of Piling Canada Kirk A. Vilks Olson (Stuart) Dominion Construction Ltd. v. Structal Heavy Steel, made by Manitoba Court of Appeal that has now been reviewed and upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC). While the SCC upheld the decision, they also provided some additional comments that will help guide contractors who wish to avoid providing double security for a subcontractor’s lien.

To read the full article, please click here

Contact: David Rodighiero, Partner and Michael Elliott, Associate

The recent Supreme Court of Queensland decision of Grocon Constructors (Qld) Pty Ltd v Juniper Developer No. 2 Pty Ltd [2015] QSC 102 provides new authority on whether liquidated damages clauses constitute unenforceable penalties in construction contracts.

Read more: Liquidated damages - are they always enforceable?

Contact: David Rodighiero, Partner and Michael Elliott, Associate 

The recent decision of the Supreme Court of Western Australia in Laing O’Rourke Australia Construction Pty Ltd v Samsung C & T Corporation has provided some helpful insight on the willingness of the courts to quash determinations of adjudicators made under the Construction Contracts Act 2004 (WA) (Act). In most state jurisdictions, applicants applying to have an adjudicator’s determination quashed, will be tasked with the onerous exercise of establishing that:

  • The decision was made as a result of jurisdictional error;
  • There has been a denial of natural justice;
  • The decision was given in bad faith;
  • The decision was procured by fraud; or
  • The decision was one which the adjudicator had no power to make.

To read the full article click here, or visit

Contact: David Rodighiero, Partner and Mark Kenney, Special Counsel

The Supreme Court of Queensland recently handed down a decision that further clarifies the licensing requirements necessary for engineers and electrical contractors to make a claim for payment under the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld) (BCIPA). This decision highlights the importance of having an appropriate licence when carrying out construction work.

To read the full article click here, or visit