Who should have won S&T v Grove in the Supreme Court?

Anthony Speaight QC, Alexander Nissen QC, Matthew Thorne and William Webb

February 2020

A paper comprising the skeleton arguments for the mock Supreme Court hearing held on 21st January 2020 before members of the Society of Construction Law and the Technology and Construction Bar Association

On 21 January 2020, following settlement of the Supreme Court appeal, counsel for the parties in S&T v Grove took part in a mock hearing, in which arguments for and against the case were rehearsed before Sir Vivian Ramsey and an audience of SCL and TECBAR members. This paper represents the skeleton arguments produced by the parties for that purpose, and is intended to reflect some of the arguments which would have been advanced by the parties had the case proceeded to appeal before the Supreme Court.

Factual background - Issue arising - The case for the Appellant - The case for the Respondent

The authors: Anthony Speaight QC and Matthew Thorne are barristers practising from 4 Pump Court and Alexander Nissen QC and William Webb are barristers practising from Keating Chambers

Text: 47 pages