Cookie consent

This website uses cookies to collect information about how you use this website. Atkin Chambers uses this information to make the website work as well as possible and improve the services provided by members and staff. You may choose to accept all cookies or chose to manage your cookie settings here:

Cookies on atkinchambers.com

Cookies are files saved on your phone, tablet or computer when you visit a website.

Atkin Chambers uses this information to make the website work as well as possible and improve the services provided by members and staff. You may choose to accept all cookies or chose to manage your cookie settings here:

Cookie settings

Atkin Chambers Limited use two types of cookie files, analytical cookies and necessary cookies. You can choose which cookies you are happy for us to use.

Analytical cookies that measure website use

Atkin Chambers Limited use Google Analytics to measure how you use the website so it can be improved based on user needs. Atkin Chambers do not allow Google to use or share the data about how you use this site.

Google Analytics sets cookies that store anonymised information about:

  • how you got to the site
  • the pages you visit on atkinchambers.com, and how long you spend on each page
  • what you click on while you’re visiting the site

Strictly necessary cookies

These essential cookies do things like remember your progress through a form (for example if you register for updates). They always need to be on.

Save changes

Almacantar (Centre Point) Ltd v Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd [2018] EWHC 232 (TCC)

21st Feb 2018

Part 8 proceedings related to a dispute arising out of a project to redevelop the landmark Centre Point Tower in London. The project involves the redevelopment of the tower and other buildings, largely for residential use with some retail and other facilities, at a cost in excess of £100 million.

The parties, Almacantar (Centre Point) Limited (“Almacantar”), the developer, and Sir Robert McAlpine (“SRM”) entered into a fixed Fee Pre-Construction Services Agreement (“the PCSA”) on 17 September 2012 with the aim of subsequently agreeing a design and build contract for the full project. In September 2014, the PCSA was terminated by consent, SRM having declined to enter the design and build contract anticipated by the PCSA. This dispute centres on SRM’s right to payment of the balance of 50% of the Fee following that termination. An adjudicator had decided that dispute in favour of SRM. These proceedings finally determined the proper construction of the payment and termination provisions of the PCSA in favour of Almacantar and resulted in the sums paid pursuant to the adjudicator’s decision having to be returned to Almacantar.

Stephen Dennison QC and Peter Land (instructed by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP) for the successful Claimant.

To view the full judgment please click here

21 February 2018





Related Juristictions

Register for updates

To keep in touch with news and updates from Atkin Chambers:

 

Register