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

“Triple Point Technology – Pointing to confusion” Anson Cheung for ICLR

14th May 2020

“Triple Point Technology – Pointing to confusion” by pupil barrister Anson Cheung appears in the most recent issue of The International Construction Law Review – the leading authority on international construction law.

The paper first summarises the previous approaches of the courts in similar claims for liquidated damages in abandonment, and surveys the approach adopted in Triple Point Technologies. It goes on to criticise the court’s decision to disapply the liquidated damages clause for three reasons:

  • the decision the Court of Appeal relied on as authoritative did not truly decide the point at common law and should have been distinguished.
  • the disapplication of the liquidated damages clause departs from the accepted understanding of accrued rights in the context of termination; and lastly,
  • that the practical significance of Triple Point Technologies creates an anomaly that incentivises breach of contract and undermines the bargain between the parties.

The paper proposes that Triple Point Technologies ought to have taken what this paper terms “the Orthodox approach”, and suggests the arguments available in reforming the law as it stands.

This article is based on one of two joint winning entries in this year’s Society of Construction Law’s Hudson essay competition – published by the SCL at http://www.scl.org.uk. 





Register for updates

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

 

Register