I thought it might be timely to remind everyone to take care when filing out and completing construction contracts and repeat the cautionary tale of Temloc v Errill Properties [1987] 39 B.L.R 30, CA.
In this case "£Nil" was inserted in the liquidated damages clause. The employer claimed that it was entitled to claim general unliquidated damages as there was no liquidated damages clause in the contract. The Court of Appeal disagreed and held that by inserting "£Nil" in the contract, liquidated damages were deemed to apply and as such were the employer's exhaustive remedy in relation to delayed completion. The result was that the employer could not claim any damages for the delayed completion of the works.