The Week That Was - 20 July 2026

Welcome to the week that was, a round-up of key events in the construction sector over the last seven days.

ADR orders

The previous editions of the TCC Guide only encouraged parties to use alternative dispute resolution (ADR).  It warned them that there may be adverse costs orders if they unreasonably refused to take part in the ADR, following the Court of Appeal decision in Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust [2004] EWCA Civ. 576.

The new 2026 edition of the TCC guide goes further and expressly states that, in appropriate cases, the court will order the parties in relation to ADR (para. 1.1.4) and confirms the court will use this power where it is necessary and appropriate to do so (para. 7.1.2).

A court can also make an ADR order (a draft ADR order is provided at appendix E to the guide).  The draft provides for the parties exchanging lists of neutral mediators and, if they cannot agree an individual, the Court will choose one to conduct the mediation, an Early Neutral Evaluation or another form of ADR.

You can access the guide here.

AI in the TCC

The new TCC guide contains a new section, 1.6, on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the TCC.  This expressly provides that legal representatives may use AI in the TCC provided that they independently verify and remain personally responsible for the accuracy of any research or case citations that have been generated with the assistance of AI, which they put before the court.

The new guidance does not require legal representatives to disclose their use of AI; it just says "whether and to what extent legal representatives should disclose their use of AI will depend on the context", and "any doubt as to whether the fact that AI has been used should be mentioned must be resolved in favour of disclosing such use".

This new guidance generally supports the use of AI in the TCC.  We expect to see it used increasingly often.

You can access the guide here.

Building Safety claims

The new TCC guide also has a new section, 9.1, on Building Safety Act Business which provides a new procedure for dealing with claims under the Building Safety Act (BSA).

The courts are clearly concerned about multiple claims under the BSA being made in both the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) and in the TCC about the same building and issues; the new procedure seeks to manage these claims.

The guidance also makes clear that, because only the High Court has the jurisdiction to make building liability orders under section 130 of the BSA,  the minimum claim values guidance set out in section 1.3.2 of the new guide does not apply.  The TCC in London will consider transferring claims of up to £1m to the Central London County Court unless there is a good reason for it not to do so.

We expect to see a lot more construction disputes being dealt with in the Central London County Court.

You can access the guide here. 

Essendi UK Hotels 2 Ltd v London Property Company

In Essendi UK Hotels 2 Ltd v London Property Company Ltd [2026] EWHC 1354, the TCC held that a landlord’s covenant to “keep [the building] in good condition” could require replacement of unsafe cladding to meet fire‑safety obligations, even where the cladding had not physically deteriorated.

The Court confirmed that the presumption to keep a building in “good condition” obligation does not require a Landlord to remedy safety defects where there is no deterioration, but that presumption can be overturned in some circumstances. Further, the Court confirmed that where a multi-storey building providing accommodation (including a hotel) an obligation entered into post-Grenfell, to put and keep the premise in a good condition would include an obligation to remove and replace cladding or some other inherent defect.

The judgment can be found here.

BSR to “reset” building assessment certificates with a more targeted approach

The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) has announced that it will move to a more proportionate, intelligence-led and risk-based approach to assessing occupied higher-risk buildings (HRBs) and issuing building assessment certificates (BACs).  

The shift follows early implementation challenges since the BAC regime began in April 2024, including assessment times taking around twice as long as expected and a reported 66% refusal rate so far this year.

The BSR's legal duties on principal accountable persons (PAPs) and accountable persons (APs) remain fully in force.

Updated resources (e.g.  simplified assessment criteria and clearer technical guidance) are expected from September 2026.

See the Government's press release here. 

Tier one firms urge next PM to stick with £725bn infrastructure plan

Major contractors and construction industry bodies have urged the next UK prime minister to maintain the government’s 10‑year infrastructure strategy and its £725bn pipeline, following Sir Keir Starmer’s resignation. 

In an open letter, 28 signatories called on Starmer’s successor to “stay the course”, arguing that long‑term certainty is essential to support economic growth, energy security and climate adaptation.  

Industry bodies backing the letter include Build UK, the Chartered Institute of Building, the Association for Consultancy and Engineering and the Institution of Civil Engineers.  

The letter warns that political uncertainty has repeatedly slowed delivery and argues against restarting plans from scratch.  The appeal follows April’s reduction of the Government Major Projects Portfolio from 213 schemes to 81.

To read the full article, please click here [may require subscription]. 

Eastleigh lines up £40m two-stage tender for 192-home Kings Copse Avenue scheme

Eastleigh Borough Council is preparing to launch a £40m design-and-build tender for the 192-home Kings Copse Avenue housing development in Hampshire, which already has full planning permission. 

The contract is due to run from 01/03/2027 to 31/07/2030, with an option to extend to 31/07/2032 depending on the pace of sales and lettings, which would affect build rate. 

The council, which owns the site, said key appointments and enabling works have already been completed.

You can read more here [may require subscription]. 

Buildings Under 11 Metres: Cladding Remediation Fund

The government is expanding the Cladding Safety Systems to support the remediation of unsafe cladding and external wall systems in eligible multi-occupied residential buildings under 11 metres in England.  Funding will be prioritised based on cladding fire safety risk based on a Fire Risk Appraisal of External Walls (FRAEW) carried out in accordance with PAS 9980:2022. 

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government says the scheme will improve safety and help protect leaseholders from the costs of necessary remedial works, although the amount of new funding has not yet been announced.  The move forms part of a broader shift towards a risk-based approach to remediation rather than solely on building height.

Please see government guidance here.

The standard of Northern Ireland's healthcare buildings

It has been found that nearly 6 in 10 of Northern Ireland’s healthcare buildings are below an acceptable standard or require extensive fixes.  The review of the healthcare estate for 2023/24 said 20% of facilities were 'unacceptable' and a further 38% needed significant repairs, leaving only 42% in or above acceptable condition.  

Auditor general Dorinnia Carville warned that, while mitigations are in place to protect patients, staff and services, a reactive approach risks higher costs later.  The report says many buildings are ageing and no longer fit for purpose, with almost half over 50 years old and 16% more than 75 years old.  The maintenance backlog totals more than £1.6bn.

Please see the full article attached here [may require subscription]. 

With thanks to Emma Caro, Georgie Rossall, Nishtha Guha, Nia Dalton, Jonathan Carrington and Keira-Anne Dowsell

Disclaimer: The information in this publication is for guidance purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.  We attempt to ensure that the content is current as at the date of publication, but we do not guarantee that it remains up to date.  You should seek legal or other professional advice before acting or relying on any of the content.

If you have any queries please do get in contact with a member of the team, or your usual RPC contact.