Exclusions from Immunity: Gross Negligence and Wilful Misconduct

Accessing papers

If you are logged in as a member or a registered academic, you will see a link to download the paper for FREE. The link is just above the Add to Cart button.

If you wish to purchase the paper, you must be logged in first (click here to log in, or click here to register). You will then see the Add to Cart button. You may also have a choice of preferred format if both are available - PDF download costs £3 inc VAT, printed version costs £7.50 inc postage (no VAT). Choosing one or the other changes the price displayed.

When you are ready to check out, use the 'View basket' link in the top left of the website.

James Pickavance and James Bowling

October 2017

A paper presented to the Society of Construction Law at a meeting in London on 5th September 2017

This paper analyses the terms ‘gross negligence’ and ‘wilful misconduct’ which continue to be used regularly as carve-outs from exclusion or limitation clauses in construction contracts.  However, parties are reluctant, or unable, to define the terms in those contracts and they are left to the courts to grapple with.  The paper examines the relevant authorities and the development of the treatment of both gross negligence and wilful misconduct, noting that the terms appear to apply a high bar to a successful attempt to disapply an exclusion clause.  The paper assesses the specific problems likely to arise in practice, of causation, multiple breaches, delay, vicarious liability and termination.  Concluding that the two terms are here to stay, the authors use the relevant authorities and apply business common sense to suggest working definitions of gross negligence and wilful misconduct which could be a starting-point for contracts or used as guidance and criteria to assess whether an action or inaction falls within the auspices of these terms.

Introduction – Exclusion from immunity: Gross negligence – Development of the case law – Gross negligence: Towards a working definition – Exclusion from immunity: Wilful misconduct or default – Development of the case law – Wilful misconduct: Towards a working definition – Particular problems and scenarios in practice – Causation – Multiple breaches – Delay – Vicarious liability and wilful misconduct – Termination and wilful misconduct – Conclusion.

The authors: James Pickavance is a partner with Eversheds Sutherland LLP, solicitors in London and James Bowling is a barrister practising at 4 Pump Court, London. 

Text: 35 pages

Paper number: 
D207
October 2017, online, 520k
£3.00

Our papers

The Society has published nearly 400 papers since 1984. Some are published both in hard copy and electronically (numbered), others in electronic format only (number prefixed 'D'). The hard copy papers can be purchased (except those marked with an asterisk which are no longer available). They are all also available as PDF files to download.

Those available as downloads can be accessed free by members and registered academics (students and staff) - if logged in, they will see a link to the file just above the Add to Cart button on each paper's page. Others can purchase the PDF file for a cost of £3.00. Note that this sum includes VAT, since VAT is chargeable on digital files.

For further instructions on downloading, click here. The PDF file will only open on your computer if you have Adobe Acrobat installed (to obtain a free copy, click here). To save the paper to your computer, choose the 'save' icon on the Acrobat toolbar before opening the paper.

For personal use only

The papers on this website are for use by SCL members (and those who pay for them) only, and papers may be downloaded, printed and/or otherwise retained for that purpose only by members of the SCL (and those who purchase them).  The availability of all papers past and present represents a significant benefit to members of SCL and wider dissemination of SCL papers dilutes that to the detriment of the membership.  Further and more importantly, copyright in the papers belongs jointly to the writers of the paper and to the SCL, and the SCL is not therefore in a position to provide any wider licence.  Accordingly the SCL asks members and those who purchase papers not to disseminate papers more widely than their licence allows (e.g. by posting them on internal legal resource intranet databases and the like). 

Feedback