The Week That Was - 6 March 2026

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

Consultation on General Safety Requirements for Construction Products opened

Alongside the White Paper for Construction Products Reform, a consultation has been launched for the scope of the proposed General Safety Requirement (GSR) for all construction products, as part of the proposed overhaul of construction product safety more generally. The GSR is the proposed second route for products to meet requirements, with the other being where designated standards apply. 

The GSR in general terms is proposed to be a requirement for a manufacturer to assess the safety risks connected to the intended use and the normal or reasonably foreseeable conditions of use and take proportionate action to control such risks. The Consultation sets out key proposals including: mandatory risk assessments, product information requirements, labelling, record keeping, storage and transportation, obligations on importers and distributors and monitoring of safety issues. 

The consultation is open until 20 May 2026 and can be found here.

Manifest error for expert determination clarified – WH Holding Ltd v London Stadium LLP (formerly E20 Stadium LLP) [2026 EWCA Civ 153

An appeal against the High Court's judgement, setting aside an expert's determination, was allowed by the Court of Appeal. The expert’s determination was valid and binding on the parties. Summarised, the test is "[a]bsent contractual terms which provide differently when interpreted in context, an error will be manifest if, after investigation limited in time and extent, it is so obvious (and obviously capable of affecting the determination) as to admit of no difference of opinion" (para 45). There was no restriction in the authorities as to the judge's reasoning process, however the Court of Appeal noted that the test did invite a 2-stage approach, firstly has there been an error and secondly was it so obvious as to admit no difference of opinion. 

The Court of Appeal also rejected the argument that the limited investigation allowed adversarial argument to be shut out or restricted. That is, if the expert's determination is challenged in court, the court will need to review competing statements of case and evidence, as well as the parties being able to make submissions. 

The judgment can be found here.

Claims time-barred where solicitors failed to use High Court mandatory electronic filing system

In Lukins and another v Quality Part X Ltd and another [2026] EWHC 301 (KB) the High Court has granted reverse summary judgment on the basis that the claimants' negligence and nuisance claims arising from a fire on 6 April 2018 were time-barred under section 2 of the Limitation Act 1980. The central issue was whether proceedings were "brought" within the six-year limitation period when the claimants' solicitors sent claim forms by post to the court on 25 March 2024 (received 26 March 2024), rather than using the mandatory electronic filing system (CE-File) as required by PD 51O for legally represented parties since 1 July 2019. The court held that there was a clear line of Court of Appeal authority to the effect that, in cases such as this, a claimant must do at least all that could reasonably be expected to ensure proceedings are issued within time. The test of reasonableness depends on factors including the requirements of rules and practice directions, whether the claimant is legally represented, and any communication with the court. Here, the claimants' solicitors had not done all that was reasonably expected, having failed to comply with a mandatory electronic filing requirement which had been in place for over five years. 
  
The judgment can be found here.

Doubts cast over delivery of two Grenfell Inquiry reforms

Government documents released on 26 February 2026 have cast doubt on the deliverability of two key Grenfell Tower Inquiry phase two recommendations previously accepted by ministers. A rapid review by the government’s Open Innovation Team questioned the practicality of creating a new construction library containing product data, fire reports and academic research. While experts agreed such a library could improve building safety and reduce costs, they highlighted major obstacles, including fragmented data, lack of standardisation, multiple existing repositories and legal and commercial sensitivities around sharing information. Despite these concerns, the government maintains it will support development of a digital construction library with the industry. Separately, the government’s first annual progress report signalled potential retreat from a proposed legal requirement for senior managers at principal designer firms to certify that all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure the safety of higher-risk buildings, saying it is exploring alternative mechanisms to secure senior-level accountability.

Read the full article here.

Bournemouth stadium redevelopment to start in the summer

AFC Bournemouth’s £85m redevelopment of the Vitality Stadium, approved in principle by Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council in January, is due to begin this summer, with preparatory enabling works already under way. The project will almost double capacity from 11,286 to about 20,000, although it remains subject to further planning permissions. Initial off season works (June - August 2026) includes demolition of the existing South Stand, construction of a new 3,000 seat lower tier, a new ticket office, internal refurbishments to the East and West stands with three new hospitality areas and upgraded media/broadcast facilities. This first phase will add more than 1,500 seats for the 2026/27 season, and a South Stand upper tier, further corner, and stand extensions to the North and East in 2027 will complete the expansion. This development marks the largest redevelopment in the ground’s history.

Read the full article here.

Fire safety warning issued over zero-compression cavity barriers

The Masonry Association of Great Britain’s (MAGB) Technical Committee has warned that cavity fire barriers must be assessed for performance over the whole life of a building, not just at laboratory test stage. In its first technical note, TN-01/26, it raises concerns about zero-compression cavity barriers, which may pass controlled fire tests but depend on “perfect geometry” that does not reflect real building behaviour. Over time, structural frame shortening, thermal expansion and construction tolerances can all widen cavities. Gaps as small as a few millimetres may allow flames and hot gases to bypass barriers, with failures hidden from view and not detectable through routine inspection, creating serious life-safety, liability and reputational risks. MAGB therefore recommends cavity barriers with positive compression, specifying a nominal minimum preload of 5mm (or more if supported by testing), to maintain continuous contact and integrity as buildings move during their service life. 

Read the full article here.

RIBA enshrines abolition of ARB in official strategy

RIBA has set out a reform strategy, Towards Tomorrow’s Architecture, making the repeal of the Architects Act 1997 and abolition of the Architects Registration Board (ARB) a primary objective. It argues that scrapping the Act would further its 'campaign on competence' pushing for the introduction of reserved activities for competent professionals. Other priorities include reforming architectural education with a five year route to becoming an architect. Measures will include publishing fee guidance for clients, developing a Master of Business Administration in Architecture, and improving public and private procurement processes. RIBA frames the package as necessary modernisation of professional regulation and practice. 

Read the full article here.

With thanks to Richard Tosh, Emrys Moore and Jessica Hill

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 below, or your usual RPC contact.