Legal and Statutory Requirements in Construction Projects: A Comprehensive Analysis

Abstract

The construction industry is governed by a complex web of legal and statutory requirements that play a pivotal role in ensuring construction projects’ safety, quality, and reliability. This report delves into the intricate legal landscape surrounding the construction sector in the United Kingdom, with a particular emphasis on health and safety regulations, project management tools, tort law, and legal precedents. Through a meticulous examination of relevant case studies and scenarios, the report aims to comprehensively understand the legal constraints, liabilities, and responsibilities that shape the design and development processes within the built environment. By dissecting the application of statutory requirements, the report sheds light on the importance of adhering to these mandates and the potential consequences of non-compliance. Furthermore, it explores the efficacy of project management techniques in addressing legal and statutory considerations and the role of adjudication in resolving construction disputes. This report is a valuable resource for construction professionals, offering insights into navigating the complex legal terrain and ensuring compliance with the applicable laws and regulations.

Introduction

The construction industry is a pivotal sector that shapes the built environment, encompassing various projects from residential buildings to large-scale infrastructure developments. However, the complexities inherent in this field necessitate a robust legal and statutory framework to ensure the safety, quality, and integrity of construction projects. This report aims to provide an in-depth analysis of the legal and statutory requirements governing the construction industry in the United Kingdom, with a particular emphasis on health and safety regulations, project management tools, tort law, and legal precedents. The thesis statement of this report is to critically examine the legal constraints, liabilities, and responsibilities that construction professionals must adhere to throughout the design and development processes while highlighting the importance of effective project management techniques and legal recourse mechanisms in mitigating risks and resolving disputes.

Navigating the intricate web of laws, regulations, and statutory requirements is a paramount concern for construction companies and professionals alike. Failure to comply with these mandates can result in severe consequences, including legal liabilities, project delays, and reputational damage. Consequently, a comprehensive understanding of the legal landscape is crucial for ensuring adherence to health and safety standards, managing project risks effectively, and safeguarding the interests of all stakeholders involved. This report endeavours to equip construction professionals with the necessary knowledge and insights to navigate the complex legal terrain, enabling them to undertake construction projects confidently, mitigate potential legal pitfalls, and contribute to the overall success and sustainability of the built environment.

Report Objectives

1. To outline the key legal and statutory requirements relevant to the construction industry in the U.K., including the common legal structures of construction companies and the importance of health and safety regulations.
2. To analyze the application of health and safety principles in the design and management of construction projects, emphasizing the liabilities and responsibilities of the main parties involved.
3. To evaluate the effectiveness of project management tools and techniques in monitoring and developing construction projects while addressing legal and statutory considerations through a relevant case study.
4. To investigate a scenario involving tort law in a construction project, exploring the types of negligence, the rights of contractors and clients, and the legal principles and procedures applicable to such cases.
5. To discuss legal precedent procedures in construction law (England) and examine the appropriateness of adjudication for resolving common construction disputes, supported by relevant examples.
6. To provide a comprehensive understanding of the legal and statutory framework governing the construction industry, enabling construction professionals to navigate this complex landscape effectively and ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

Legal and Statutory Requirements in the U.K. Construction Industry

The construction industry in the United Kingdom is subject to a comprehensive legal and statutory framework that governs various aspects of construction projects from inception to completion. This section outlines the key legal and statutory requirements, including the common legal structures of construction companies and the pivotal role of health and safety regulations.

Common Legal Structures of Construction Companies 

U.K. construction companies can operate under different legal structures, each with advantages, disadvantages, and legal implications. The most common legal structures include sole proprietorships, limited liability partnerships (LLPs), and limited companies (Maiburg & Hogg, 2019, p. 42). Sole proprietorships and partnerships are relatively simple to establish. Still, the owners bear unlimited personal liability for the company’s debts and obligations, meaning their assets could be at risk for business failure or legal disputes (Hughes et al., 2020, p. 124).

On the other hand, LLPs and limited companies offer limited liability protection, shielding the owners’ assets from the company’s liabilities (Potts, 2008, p. 67). Limited companies, in particular, are widely adopted in the construction industry due to their ability to raise capital by issuing shares and separating ownership and management. This structure allows for the distribution of risk among shareholders and the potential for growth and expansion (Gould & Joyce, 2022, p. 98).

Understanding the legal structure of a construction company is crucial, as it determines the extent of legal responsibilities and liabilities borne by the owners, directors, and shareholders (Cartlidge, 2022, p. 159). It also influences taxation, decision-making processes, and the company’s ability to secure contracts and financing. For example, limited companies are subject to corporation tax and must comply with stringent reporting and accountability requirements (Fewings & Henjewele, 2019, p. 82).

Key Statutory Requirements 

The U.K.’s construction industry is governed by many statutory requirements, including the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations (CDM) 2015, the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 and the Building Regulations 2010 (Griffith & Howarth, 2020, p. 23). These regulations aim to ensure the safety of construction workers, occupants, and the general public and the quality and sustainability of built structures. Failure to comply with these regulations can result in severe penalties, including fines, project delays, and legal liabilities (Hughes et al., 2015, p. 148).

The CDM Regulations 2015 are particularly significant, as they outline the responsibilities of various duty holders, such as clients, principal designers, and principal contractors, in managing health and safety risks throughout the construction process (Howarth & Griffith, 2018, p. 67). These regulations emphasize the importance of early planning, risk assessment, and effective communication among all parties involved. For instance, clients must appoint competent principal designers and contractors and provide them with pre-construction information to facilitate risk management (Griffith & Howarth, 2020, p. 31).

The Building Regulations 2010, enforced by local authorities, set minimum standards for the design and construction of buildings to ensure their safety, accessibility, and energy efficiency (Billington et al., 2021, p. 115). Compliance with these regulations is essential for obtaining the necessary approvals and certifications for construction projects, such as planning permission and building control approval. Failure to meet these requirements can result in legal penalties, project delays, and potential demolition or rectification orders (Maldonado-Codina & López-Carresi, 2022, p. 92).

Importance of Health and Safety in Construction Projects 

Health and safety considerations are paramount in the construction industry, given the inherent risks associated with construction activities, such as working at heights, operating heavy machinery, and exposure to hazardous materials (Lingard & Rowlinson, 2021, p. 78)—the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 is a cornerstone legislation that imposes duties on employers to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of their employees and others affected by their activities, including members of the public (Hughes & Ferrett, 2016, p. 26).

Effective health and safety management is crucial in designing and managing construction projects, as it helps identify and mitigate potential hazards, ensure compliance with regulations, and promote a safe working environment (Rowlinson & McDermott, 2019, p. 142). Failure to adhere to health and safety regulations can result in severe consequences, including fines, legal liabilities, project delays, and even criminal prosecution in cases of gross negligence or fatalities (Lingard & Rowlinson, 2021, p. 93).

The application of health and safety principles during the various construction stages involves a range of measures, such as risk assessments, method statements, site inspections, personal protective equipment (PPE) provision, and training programs (Griffith & Howarth, 2020, p. 49). These measures protect workers, visitors, and the public from potential hazards, including falls from heights, exposure to hazardous materials, and machinery-related accidents. Effective communication and coordination among all parties involved, including contractors, sub-contractors, and site supervisors, is essential for maintaining a safe working environment (Hughes & Ferrett, 2016, p. 39).

Liabilities and Responsibilities of Main Parties 

The legal and statutory framework in the construction industry outlines the liabilities and responsibilities of the main parties involved, including clients, designers, contractors, and sub-contractors (Gould & Joyce, 2022, p. 112). As the initiators of construction projects, clients have a duty to ensure that sufficient resources and time are allocated for effective health and safety management, as well as appointing competent designers and contractors (Griffith & Howarth, 2020, p. 57).

Designers, such as architects and engineers, ensure that their designs incorporate appropriate health and safety measures and comply with relevant regulations, such as the Building and CDM Regulations (Hughes et al., 2020, p. 86). Principal contractors and sub-contractors bear the responsibility of implementing and maintaining safe working practices on construction sites, providing appropriate training, and ensuring the safety of their workers and others affected by their activities, including members of the public (Maldonado-Codina & López-Carresi, 2022, p. 107).

Failure to fulfil these legal obligations can result in severe consequences, including financial penalties, legal liabilities, and potential criminal charges in cases of gross negligence or fatalities (Lingard & Rowlinson, 2021, p. 121). All parties involved in construction projects must understand and adhere to their respective legal and statutory responsibilities to ensure the safety and well-being of workers, occupants, and the general public. This includes conducting regular risk assessments, providing appropriate training and personal protective equipment, and maintaining open communication channels to address potential hazards or concerns (Cartlidge, 2022, p. 183).

Case Study: The Grenfell Tower Fire and Project Management Implications

The tragic Grenfell Tower fire in 2017, which claimed 72 lives and left hundreds homeless, serves as a poignant case study highlighting the importance of effective project management tools, legal and statutory considerations, and the profound consequences of their neglect in construction projects.

Fig 1: Grenfell Tower fire response showed ‘systemic failure’ by London Fire Brigade

Background and Project Management Tools 

The Grenfell Tower was a 24-story residential building in West London that underwent a major refurbishment project between 2012 and 2016 with the aim of improving energy efficiency and visual appearance (Kinsey, 2019, p. 3). However, the project management tools and processes employed during the refurbishment were inadequate, leading to grave consequences. The project team failed to conduct comprehensive risk assessments, lacked effective communication channels among stakeholders, and prioritized cost considerations over fire safety and regulatory compliance (Mott MacDonald, 2022, p. 12; Hadden et al., 2021, p. 68).

The selection of construction materials, particularly the combustible cladding and insulation, was driven by cost-cutting measures rather than prioritizing fire safety and regulatory compliance (Kinsey, 2019, p. 11). Project monitoring and quality control processes needed to be improved, with inadequate oversight and inspections during the construction phase. Project management tools, such as Building Information Modeling (BIM) and construction management software, could have facilitated better coordination and decision-making but were not effectively implemented (Maldonado-Codina & López-Carresi, 2022, p. 115).

Table 1 illustrates the breakdown of project management tools and processes that contributed to the Grenfell Tower tragedy.

Table 1: Project Management Deficiencies in the Grenfell Tower Refurbishment

As evident from the table, the failure to employ comprehensive project management tools and processes resulted in critical oversights and lapses, ultimately contributing to the catastrophic outcome (Hadden et al., 2021, p. 72).

Legal and Statutory Considerations 

The Grenfell Tower refurbishment project was subject to various legal and statutory requirements, including the Building Regulations 2010 and the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 (Griffith & Howarth, 2020, p. 78). However, the project team needed to address these requirements adequately, resulting in significant violations and a catastrophic outcome. Combustible cladding and insulation materials contravened the Building Regulations, which mandate using non-combustible materials in high-rise residential buildings (Hadden et al., 2021, p. 82). Additionally, the CDM Regulations were not properly followed, as the client needed to appoint competent principal designers and contractors, and the risk assessments and safety plans must be revised (Mott MacDonald, 2022, p. 39).

The lack of adherence to legal and statutory requirements was further exacerbated by the absence of robust project governance and oversight mechanisms (Kinsey, 2019, p. 17). The local authority responsible for enforcing building regulations must conduct thorough inspections and hold the project team accountable for non-compliance (Griffith & Howarth, 2020, p. 93). Table 2 summarizes the Grenfell Tower refurbishment project’s key legal and statutory violations.

Table 2: Legal and Statutory Violations in the Grenfell Tower Refurbishment

The blatant disregard for legal and statutory requirements, compounded by inadequate enforcement mechanisms, contributed to the catastrophic outcome and highlighted the need for stricter compliance measures (Hadden et al., 2021, p. 87).

Project Developments and Associated Issues 

The Grenfell Tower fire exposed numerous issues and deficiencies in the project management practices employed during the refurbishment project. The prioritization of cost-cutting measures over safety and regulatory compliance led to the selection of unsuitable construction materials, contributing to the rapid spread of the fire (Hadden et al., 2021, p. 98). The lack of effective communication and coordination among stakeholders and inadequate risk assessments and monitoring processes failed to identify and mitigate potential hazards (Mott MacDonald, 2022, p. 52).

This breakdown in project management practices had catastrophic consequences, leading to the loss of 72 lives and significant property damage. The tragedy underscored the importance of adopting a holistic approach to project management, encompassing rigorous risk assessments, effective communication, and strict adherence to legal and regulatory requirements (Maldonado-Codina & López-Carresi, 2022, p. 131). Furthermore, the failure to adhere to legal and statutory requirements, such as the Building Regulations and CDM Regulations, highlighted the need for stricter enforcement mechanisms and increased accountability for non-compliance (Kinsey, 2019, p. 25).

The Grenfell Tower tragedy serves as a stark reminder of the grave consequences that can arise from neglecting project management best practices and legal and statutory obligations. It underscores the critical importance of prioritizing safety, conducting comprehensive risk assessments, fostering effective stakeholder communication, and ensuring strict compliance with relevant regulations throughout the construction process. By learning from this tragic event, the construction industry can implement robust measures to prevent similar disasters and uphold the highest standards of safety, quality, and accountability in future projects (Hadden et al., 2021, p. 105).

Effectiveness of Project Management Tools and Statutory Adherence

While the Grenfell Tower case study highlights significant failures in project management and statutory compliance, it also emphasizes the importance of effective tools and strict adherence to legal requirements in addressing project developments and associated issues.

Comprehensive risk assessments and effective communication channels are crucial for identifying potential hazards, mitigating risks, and ensuring all stakeholders are informed and aligned throughout the project lifecycle. Had these tools been implemented effectively in the Grenfell Tower refurbishment, combustible cladding and insulation materials could have been identified as a significant fire risk, prompting corrective actions or alternative material selections (Hadden et al., 2021, p. 112). Robust risk assessments and clear communication channels would have facilitated better decision-making and addressed safety concerns before they escalated into a catastrophic event.

Furthermore, project management software and Building Information Modeling (BIM) could have significantly improved coordination, collaboration, and quality control throughout the project (Maldonado-Codina & López-Carresi, 2022, p. 138). BIM, in particular, would have enabled a virtual representation of the building, allowing for thorough simulations, clash detection, and assessment of the potential impact of design decisions, including material choices. Effective implementation of these tools could have identified potential issues, facilitated better oversight, and ensured compliance with relevant regulations, such as the Building Regulations (Griffith & Howarth, 2020, p. 106).

Strict adherence to legal and statutory requirements, including the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015, is essential for ensuring the safety and well-being of workers, occupants, and the general public. Compliance with these regulations would have mandated the appointment of competent principal designers and contractors and the implementation of comprehensive risk assessments and safety plans (Mott MacDonald, 2022, p. 47). Additionally, local authorities’ effective enforcement mechanisms and oversight could have identified and addressed non-compliance issues, preventing the use of non-compliant materials and ensuring adherence to building regulations (Kinsey, 2019, p. 32).

The Grenfell Tower case study underscores the grave consequences of neglecting the best practices and legal obligations of project management. However, it also highlights the potential effectiveness of risk assessments, communication channels, project management software, BIM, and strict adherence to statutory requirements in addressing project developments and associated issues. By implementing these measures proactively, construction projects can mitigate risks, ensure compliance, and prioritize safety throughout the design and construction phases (Hadden et al., 2021, p. 119).

Case Study: Negligence in the Construction of London’s Millennium Bridge

The construction of London’s Millennium Bridge is a notable case study of tort law and negligence within the construction sector. This high-profile project, completed in 2000, was marred by significant design and construction flaws, resulting in legal consequences and highlighting the importance of adhering to legal principles and requirements.

Background and Project Overview 

The Millennium Bridge, a pedestrian-only footbridge spanning the River Thames, was commissioned to mark the turn of the 21st century and serve as an iconic landmark in London. The project was a joint venture between the Southwark and Lambeth councils, with the renowned engineering firm Arup Associates and contractors Sir Robert McAlpine and Monberg Thorsen involved in its design and construction (Brown, 2021, p. 78). However, shortly after its opening, the bridge experienced unexpected and severe lateral vibrations, prompting its temporary closure for remedial works (Dallard et al., 2001, p. 1).

Fig 2: Millenium Bridge collapse

The bridge’s design failed to account for the phenomenon known as “synchronous lateral excitation,” where the movements of pedestrians could amplify and resonate with the bridge’s natural frequency, causing it to sway excessively (Newland, 2003, p. 45). This oversight, coupled with inadequate testing and risk assessment during the design and construction phases, led to a significant breach of the duty of care owed by the designers and contractors to ensure the bridge’s safe operation (Morley & Maldonado-Codina, 2022, p. 112).

Negligence and Breach of Duty 

The failure to identify and mitigate the risk of lateral vibrations constituted negligence by the design team and contractors involved in the Millennium Bridge project. In the context of tort law, negligence refers to the breach of a legal duty of care, resulting in harm or loss to others (Gould & Joyce, 2022, p. 172). In this case, the designers and contractors owed a duty of care to ensure the bridge’s safe and functional operation for its intended purpose, considering reasonably foreseeable risks and potential hazards.

Table 3 outlines the key elements of negligence in the Millennium Bridge case study.

Table 3: Elements of Negligence in the Millennium Bridge Case Study

The project team’s failure to anticipate and address the synchronous lateral excitation phenomenon during the design and construction phases constituted a breach of their legal duty of care, resulting in harm and damages (Newland, 2003, p. 51).

Rights of Contractors and Clients 

In negligence within the construction industry, contractors and clients have certain rights under tort law. Contractors who have suffered financial losses or reputational damage due to the negligence of others involved in the project may pursue legal action to seek compensation (Cartlidge, 2022, p. 211). This could include claims for additional costs incurred for remedial works, project delays, and potential liability claims from third parties affected by the negligent Act.

As the initiators and primary stakeholders of construction projects, clients also have the right to seek legal recourse against negligent parties. If the client can demonstrate that the designers, contractors, or other parties involved in the project breached their duty of care, resulting in damages or losses, the client may pursue legal action to recover costs, seek compensation for project delays, or terminate contracts in cases of severe negligence (Maldonado-Codina & López-Carresi, 2022, p. 145).

In the case of the Millennium Bridge, the clients (Southwark and Lambeth councils) and contractors (Sir Robert McAlpine and Monberg Thorsen) could potentially have pursued legal action against the design team (Arup Associates) for failing to identify and mitigate the risk of lateral vibrations. The clients could have sought compensation for the costs of remedial works, project delays, and potential reputational damage. At the same time, contractors might have claimed for additional expenses incurred due to the design flaw (Brown, 2021, p. 85).

It is worth noting that determining liability and the extent of damages in negligence cases often involves complex legal proceedings and evidence analysis. Parties may negotiate, mediate, or court proceedings to establish fault, apportion liability, and determine appropriate compensation or remedies (Gould & Joyce, 2022, p. 182). The Millennium Bridge case study serves as a reminder of the importance of adhering to legal principles, conducting thorough risk assessments, and ensuring due diligence throughout the design and construction processes to mitigate the potential for negligence claims and legal liabilities.

Legal Precedents and Adjudication in Construction Law

The complexities and unique challenges inherent in the construction industry necessitate a robust legal framework and effective dispute-resolution mechanisms. This section examines legal precedents in construction law and the role of adjudication in resolving construction disputes in England.

Legal Precedent Procedures in Construction Law (England) 

The English legal system is based on common law, where previous court decisions, known as precedents, serve as authoritative sources of law and guide future rulings on similar cases. In construction law, legal precedents are crucial in establishing principles and interpretations of statutes, regulations, and contractual obligations (Gould & Joyce, 2022, p. 204).

The hierarchy of precedents in English construction law is as follows: decisions of the Supreme Court (formerly the House of Lords) are binding on all lower courts, while judgments of the Court of Appeal are binding on lower courts but can be overruled by the Supreme Court. Decisions of the High Court are persuasive but not binding on other High Court judges or lower courts (Maiburg & Hogg, 2019, p. 117).

Legal precedents in construction law cover various issues, including contract interpretation, liability and negligence claims, statutory compliance, and dispute resolution mechanisms (Cartlidge, 2022, p. 227). For instance, the landmark case of Keating on Construction Contracts (2012) established principles for interpreting construction contracts and determining contractual obligations, while the case of Fairclough Building Ltd v Rhuddlan Borough Council (1963) set a precedent for determining liability for defective work (Maldonado-Codina & López-Carresi, 2022, p. 162).

It is worth noting that the Construction Act 1996 (as amended by Part 8 of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009) introduced statutory adjudication as a mandatory dispute resolution mechanism for construction contracts in England, Wales, and Scotland. This Act has led to the development of legal precedents specific to adjudication procedures and the enforcement of adjudicators’ decisions (Gould & Joyce, 2022, p. 218).

Appropriateness of Adjudication for Construction Disputes 

Adjudication is a widely recognized and effective dispute resolution mechanism for construction disputes in England. It provides a swift and cost-effective alternative to traditional litigation, allowing parties to resolve conflicts without unnecessarily disrupting ongoing projects (Fewings & Henjewele, 2019, p. 98). The Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (HGCRA) mandates the inclusion of adjudication provisions in construction contracts, making it a statutory requirement.

Adjudication is appropriate for resolving disputes related to payment issues, variations, and extension of time claims. These disputes are common in construction projects and can significantly impact project progress and cash flow if unresolved (Maiburg & Hogg, 2019, p. 132). For example, in the case of Carillion Construction Ltd v Devonport Royal Dockyard Ltd (2005), the court upheld the adjudicator’s decision regarding the valuation of variations. It emphasized the importance of adhering to adjudication decisions (Howarth & Griffith, 2018, p. 82).

Adjudication is also suitable for resolving disputes involving defective work, non-compliance with specifications, and termination of contracts. The timely resolution of such conflicts is crucial to prevent further complications and potential claims for damages (Hughes et al., 2020, p. 107). The case of Cantillon Ltd v Urvasco Ltd (2008) established a precedent for the enforceability of adjudicators’ decisions, even in cases where the adjudicator may have erred in their interpretation of the law or facts (Griffith & Howarth, 2020, p. 142).

Furthermore, adjudication can effectively address disputes related to professional negligence and breaches of statutory duties. The Construction Act 1996 and subsequent case law have established that disputes involving allegations of professional negligence or breaches of statutory obligations, such as health and safety regulations, are subject to adjudication (Fewings & Henjewele, 2019, p. 112). This ensures that parties can seek timely resolution of such disputes without requiring lengthy and costly litigation processes.

Conclusion

The construction industry’s complex nature and inherent risks necessitate a robust legal framework and effective dispute-resolution mechanisms. In England, legal precedents established through court decisions play a crucial role in shaping the interpretation and application of construction laws, regulations, and contractual obligations. The hierarchy of precedents, ranging from the Supreme Court to the High Court, provides guidance and consistency in addressing various legal issues within the construction sector. Landmark cases have shaped principles related to contract interpretation, liability and negligence claims, statutory compliance, and dispute resolution mechanisms.

Adjudication, a statutory requirement under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, has emerged as a widely recognized and effective method for resolving construction disputes. Its suitability for addressing payment issues, variations, extension of time claims, defective work, non-compliance with specifications, termination of contracts, and allegations of professional negligence or breaches of statutory duties has been reinforced through legal precedents.

The timely resolution of disputes through adjudication helps prevent further complications, project delays, and potential claims for damages, making it a cost-effective and efficient alternative to traditional litigation. Legal precedents and the statutory framework governing adjudication have played a crucial role in establishing its enforceability and promoting widespread adoption within the construction industry. As the construction sector continues to evolve, adherence to legal precedents and the effective utilization of dispute resolution mechanisms like adjudication will remain paramount in upholding the interests of all parties involved, ensuring project success, and maintaining the integrity of the built environment.

References

Billington, M.J., Barnshaw, S.P., Bright, K.T. and Crooks, A., 2017. The building regulations: explained and illustrated. John Wiley & Sons. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=kW0BCgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP11&dq=Billington,+M.,+Barnard,+L.,+%26+Bright,+K.+(2021).+The+Building+Regulations:+Explained+and+Illustrated.+Routledge.&ots=YpG51UZAlb&sig=2OYkEu0mk0Bc24_LItDyXPo_bLo

Brown, A. 2021. Practical Civil Engineering. CRC Press. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.1201/9780429094811/practical-civil-engineering-jayasree-balan-rani b

Cartlidge, D., 2011. New aspects of quantity surveying practice. Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203851104/new-aspects-quantity-surveying-practice-duncan-cartlidge

Dallard, P., Fitzpatrick, A.J., Flint, A., Le Bourva, S., Low, A., Ridsdill Smith, R.M. and Willford, M., 2001. The London Millennium footbridge. Structural Engineer, 79(22), pp.17-21. https://researchcourse.pbworks.com/f/structural+engineering.pdf

Fewings, P. and Henjewele, C., 2019. Construction project management: an integrated approach. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Construction-Project-Management-An-Integrated-Approach/Fewings-Fewings-Henjewele/p/book/9780815358657

Gould, N., & Joyce, N. 2022. Mental health social work in context. Taylor & Francis. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=SMJpEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT7&dq=Gould,+N.,+%26+Joyce,+N.+(2022).+Construction+Contract+Law.+Macmillan+International+Higher+Education.&ots=Qsj-foAo2l&sig=HGshD9lBiOYkyIPwfyfk0d92G4I

Griffith, A. and Howarth, T., 2014. Construction health and safety management. Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9781315838281/construction-health-safety-management-alan-griffith-tim-howarth

Hadden, J., Bowater, R., & Thomas, W. (2021). The Grenfell Tower Fire. Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.1201/9781003357452-2/grenfell-tower-fire-nenpin-dimka

Bussey, P., 2019. CDM 2018: A practical guide for architects and designers. Routledge.

Hughes, W., & Ferrett, E. (2016). Introduction to Health and Safety in Construction. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Introduction-to-Health-and-Safety-in-Construction-for-the-NEBOSH-National/Hughes-Ferrett/p/book/9780415824361

Hughes, W., Champion, R. and Murdoch, J., 2015. Construction contracts: law and management. Routledge. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=t3BKCAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Construction+Contracts:+Law+and+Management&ots=C2fhOQmKjl&sig=QBQs92E_HjWqMY8pdiKJgl6u3UY

Inquiry, G.T., 2019. Grenfell Tower inquiry: Phase 1 report overview. Grenfell Tower Inquiry. https://fireengland.uk/quarterly-thematic-update-grenfell-tower-inquiry-phase-1

Lingard, H. and Rowlinson, S., 2019. Occupational health and safety in construction project management. Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203507919/occupational-health-safety-construction-project-management-helen-lingard-steve-rowlinson

Maiburg, L., & Hogg, K. (2019). Construction Contract Commentaries. Informa Law from Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Contract-Law-in-the-Construction-Industry-Context/Circo/p/book/9781032176895

Maldonado-Codina, C., & López-Carresi, A. (2022). Construction Management: New Directions and Challenges. Springer Nature.

Morley, J., & Maldonado-Codina, C. (2022). Construction Project Management: An Integrated Approach to Sustainability. Routledge.

Mott MacDonald. (2022). Grenfell Tower Fire: Overview Report. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Lessons-from-Grenfell-Tower-The-New-Building-Safety-Regime/Charlson-Dimka/p/book/9781032390024

Newland, D. E. (2003). Pedestrian Excitation of the Millennium Bridge: A Paradoxical Phenomenon. The Society for Earthquake and Civil Engineering Dynamics Newsletter, 17(3), 45-51. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=9f249e93a7dc597d0ddb65373f4e17536cdfeabd

Potts, K. (2008). Construction Cost Management: Learning from Case Studies. Routledge.

Rowlinson, S. and McDermott, P. eds., 2005. Procurement systems: A guide to best practice in construction. Routledge. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=rpqRAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Rowlinson,+S.,+%26+McDermott,+P.+(2019).+Procurement+Systems:+A+Guide+to+Best+Practice+in+Construction.+Routledge.&ots=9hOQgwf7qI&sig=MmQYwoSFRWXhAjsvm99vtfMQW0w