Home

Conditions precedent play an important role in contracts and it is often said that a party cannot benefit from its own breach. But in King Crude Carriers SA and others v Ridgebury November LLC and others [2025] UKSC 39, the Supreme Court rejected a principle from a House of Lords decision dating back to 1881, concerning whether a party can wrongfully, and in breach of contract, prevent the fulfilment of a condition precedent to that party’s payment obligation such that the innocent party cannot make a simple debt claim. In this BCLP Insight, we examine the case and consider the key takeaways.

On 17 December 2025, the government published the third Grenfell Tower Inquiry Government Progress Report (Progress Report) in addition to the Single Construction Regulator prospectus and consultation, the fire engineering authoritative statement and next steps document, the findings of the Building Safety Regulator’s review of the higher-risk building definition and an Implementation timeline. The Progress Report tracks progress against the government’s February 2025 Response to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s Phase 2 report (February Response) which contained extensive commitments to reform the current building safety regime (see this BCLP Insight for more detail). The construction sector had been waiting for most of 2025 for further insights as to what and how the regime may change so it is pleasing that the Report and accompanying publications provide more detail on the government’s plans for reform. This Insight considers the key takeaways from the publications.

Insolvency is one of the risks to consider when looking to enforce an adjudicator’s decision, but sometimes there is also a concern that a party might take steps to dissipate its assets to avoid payment. The way to address such a risk is to obtain what is known as a freezing order, which is an injunction stopping a party from transferring, selling or dealing with its assets, until a judgment is satisfied. This is not a common procedure in adjudication, but a decision from December 2025, High Tech Construction Ltd v WLP Trading and Marketing Ltd [2025] 3209 (TCC) provides a useful example of how that would work in practice and the legal tests to be applied.