Opinion – Page 601

  • Comment

    It poured and poured

    2003-09-12T00:00:00Z

    I wish to challenge Multiplex's claim (reported on 25 July, page 13) that it has completed the longest ever continuous concrete pour at Wembley Stadium, at 19.5 hours.

  • Comment

    And your point is?

    2003-09-12T00:00:00Z

    In reading your article "Towers of Doom" (29 August, page 36) I find myself having to comment on the article's validity.

  • Comment

    Cracking the crusties

    2003-09-12T00:00:00Z

    Remember Swampy? You might think those noisy, unkempt students who hijacked bulldozers at Twyford Down would have settled into a placid middle age in Basingstoke by now.

  • Comment

    No dinners for doggies

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    A warning to anyone who fancies amending a contract: if you aren't sure what you're doing, don't do it – the courts will penalise you if you mess it up

  • Comment

    How can you judge?

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    It's a good thing for dispute deciders to think out loud, but it's equally important not to give the impression they've made up their minds before the show's over

  • Comment

    The end of innocence

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    Government, employers and insurance firms all assured us our pensions were in safe hands. Now our eyes have been opened, and it's time to go it alone

  • Comment

    Hansom

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    This week, a tabloid scoops an imaginary Bin Laden plot, Michael Caine makes Taywood's day and … the key to those PFI bids? Have God in your consortium

  • Comment

    Hungary at knock-down prices

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    Our latest article on European legal systems deals with the tricky problem of being required to demolish your building after you've just finished building it

  • Comment

    Two blokes go into a pub

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    As you'll know, a man who drinks alcohol puts a thief in his mouth to steal his brains. What you may not know is that it can also negotiate construction work

  • Comment

    Give the guy a break

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    You certainly took a poke at our new construction minister (11 July, page 11).

  • Comment

    Striking exception

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    Ann Minogue writes (1 August, page 43) that the new JCT major projects form does not give extensions of time for strikes.

  • Comment

    Birmingham bull

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    Your article on Birmingham's Bull Ring (29 August, page 30) will upset many Brummies.

  • Comment

    The RICS has let us down

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    That RICS members have to turn to Building for news of a QS rebellion is proof of the extent to which our institution has let the profession down.

  • Comment

    And the banned played on

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    Wasn't your article "Scourge of the Skyline" a little sensationalist (25 July, page 24)?

  • Comment

    Keep on puffing

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    As a chartered QS, I read Nick Brooke's article (29 August, page 28) as so much hot air and piffle – does the guy honestly have any idea what it takes to manage a small QS practice in the UK in 2003? I think not.

  • Comment

    The information gap

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    In his interview, Nick Brooke, the RICS president gave no new information about the need to increase subscriptions (15 August, page 28).

  • Comment

    Sunburn and stress

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    I noted with interest the article about the need to protect site workers from the sun (8 August, page 13).

  • Comment

    Hats off!

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    Things are always a bit slow in getting to the South-west, but following the HSE guidance and your article (8 August, page 13) I was unable to purchase "a wide brimmed" hard hat from our local suppliers.

  • Comment

    Talking turf

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    Architects like to have the final say on the design, and we respect that. But we know more about roofs than they do, so how do they feel about that?

  • Comment

    Disclosure

    2003-09-05T00:00:00Z

    The defendant hospital had applied for an order for inspection under CPR 31.4(2) in respect of a witness statement and an earlier expert report referred to in expert reports produced for a personal injury claim. The appellant, Mr Lucas, resisted this application on the basis that the documents were excluded ...