← All Authorities
United Kingdom concurrent delayextension of time

Henry Boot Construction (UK) Ltd v Malmaison Hotel (Manchester) Ltd

Henry Boot Construction (UK) Ltd v Malmaison Hotel (Manchester) Ltd (1999) 70 Con LR 32 (TCC, Dyson J) is the report for the concurrent-delay ratio; [2001] QB 388 / [2000] EWCA Civ 175 is the Court of Appeal decision on appellate jurisdiction under s.69 Arbitration Act 1996
JurisdictionUnited Kingdom
CourtHigh Court of England and Wales (Technology and Construction Court) for the concurrent-delay ratio (Dyson J); Court of Appeal for [2001] QB 388
Year2001
StatusPersuasive authority

Key Principle

Where two concurrent causes of delay operate, one being a Relevant Event for which the employer bears the risk and the other being at the contractor's risk, the contractor is entitled to a full extension of time for the delay caused by the Relevant Event notwithstanding the concurrent operation of the contractor-risk event (the 'Malmaison approach').

Area of Law

construction

Related Cases

Bresco Electrical Services Ltd v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd [2020] UKSC 25
Haberdashers' Aske's Federation Trust Ltd v Lakehouse Contracts Ltd [2018] EWHC 558 (TCC)
Gosvenor London Ltd v Aygun Aluminium UK Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 2695

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Henry Boot Construction (UK) Ltd v Malmaison Hotel (Manchester) Ltd and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Henry Boot Construction (UK) L...