Good morning I need your help with assessment.

Prep a 3000 w essay on the legal issues raised in that document.

Ensure your answer is properly referenced using the OSCOLA footnote referencing system and an OSCOLA compliant bibliography is provided

You have met with a new client Bestrail Ltd, who have contacted you for advice. This is your attendance note from that initial meeting:

Attendance Note, 5^th September 2023:

The UK Government wants to build a high-speed rail link from Leicester to Birmingham to improve East-West rail links, 'Project EW1'. The Government has formed a separate, private company to run the construction scheme called Bestrail Ltd with an initial capital of 1bn. The following legal issues have arisen.

15th January 2023 - Bestrail Ltd first required a firm of consulting civil engineers to plan and survey the route. An open tendering process was commenced whereby any firm could submit a bid for the contract by 1^st February 2023 at 5pm. The invitation to tender, placed online, included a statement that:

'The lowest tender that meets Bestrail Ltd's specifications will secure the contract for the work'.

Detailed specifications were provided online with the tender invitation.

By the deadline, three bids had been received from civil engineers:

Bloom Associates - '875,000'.

The Park Partnership - '925,000 or 10,000 below the lowest bidder.'

White and Co, - '960,000'.

The contract was awarded to The Park Partnership for 865,000 (i.e. 10,000 less than Bloom Associates) in 18 equal monthly instalments. Bloom Associates believe they should have been awarded the contract.

27^th February - Bestrail Ltd required a supply of tarmac for the temporary roads on the project. 1000 tonnes were offered by McAdam Ltd. Bestrail immediately drafted an email to accept the offer, indicating that the tarmac had to be delivered by 6pm on the same day. The email also sought more information on the number of trucks that would be needed to deliver the material for traffic management purposes. For reasons unknown, the email was never received by McAdam Ltd and so the tarmac was not delivered at 6pm. Bestrail Ltd are alleging breach of contract by McAdam Ltd.

10^th March 2023 - The site required portacabins as offices. A local company Tempbase agrees to supply the cabins at short notice. The contract is worth 35,000. Tempbase are to supply and fit the accommodation on or before 10^th July. On 6^th July, Bestrail Ltd become aware that Tempbase are unlikely to meet the 10^th July date as they are behind with their orders. Worried about the financial impact from delays in works relying on the cabins, Bestrail Ltd offers to pay an extra 15,000 if the cabins are installed on time. The cabins are now installed on the 8^th July. Bestrail paid 35,000 based on the original terms but has not paid the extra 15,000 agreed. As a result, Tempbase have threatened to sue Bestrail for that extra money.

31^st March - Bestrail Ltd ordered 100,000 engineering bricks from BritBrix Ltd. On laying them, it was found that these bricks were of a defective composition causing minerals to leach out and stain the outer face of the construction where they were used. This made these areas unsightly and unlikely to pass inspection. Bestrail Ltd want to be compensated but there was a clause in the written contract agreed between the parties that states:

'BritBrix Ltd are not liable for any loss or damage whatsoever caused by defects in their products.'

16^th April 2023 - Cornucopia Plant Hire were selected to supply construction machinery such as specialised trucks and tarmac rollers, which were delivered to the site compound on 18^th April. These machines were not supplied with qualified personnel to operate them and the contract made no explicit mention of workers being supplied as well. Bestrail Ltd are only prepared to pay half the hire costs as they believe it was an implied term that drivers and operators would be supplied with the trucks as hiring out machinery without qualified workers to use them is not the industry norm.

21st June 2023 - Part of the work required a test tunnel to be drilled through particularly hard rock. Bestrail Ltd contracted with CoreCo PLC to supply huge drilling machines or 'moles'. CoreCo PLC has two suitable machines, Mole I and Mole II. The contract did not specify which machine was to be used. Mole I is in Japan where it needs to be kept available for a far more lucrative tunnel contract there. Mole II was in a nearer country and was selected by CoreCo to drill for Bestrail Ltd. Whilst Mole II was being transported by ship, there was a storm which sank the vessel in the deep sea and Mole II is lost with it. CoreCo PLC have argued that their failure to deliver the drilling machine is not a breach of contract because the contract was frustrated. The failure to provide the drill results in additional costs to Bestrail for 250,000 that they want to claim from CoreCo. There was a further 250,000 of costs accrued because in dealing with this problem, Bestrail Ltd was forced to delay work on a different, confidential government project indefinitely. Bestrail Ltd want this to be added to their claim against CoreCo PLC making a total of 500,000.

22nd July 2023 - Bestrail Ltd required secure fencing for the site after threats from environmental protest groups. Safefence were contacted who quoted a price to supply and install a 2-metre-high security fence around the site compound. Before being awarded the contract, Safefence knew that the compound was at risk from break-ins by protestors based on local news reports and so in pre-contract negotiations, they state that it is high strength without checking with the manufacturer. Because of this statement, the contract was then awarded to Safefence although the contract wording itself made no reference to the specific strength of fence required. The compound was fenced off on 25^th July. The fencing was in fact a relatively soft alloy and by 27^th July, the protestors had cut through into the compound and did 10,000 worth of damage to Bestrail Ltd's property in that compound. Bestrail Ltd would like to recoup the 10,000 from Safefence and seek rescission as Bestrail Ltd relied on the statement in awarding the contract.

______

Write an essay considering the legal position regarding each of the disputes which are highlighted by the above chronology.

(Note: You also MUST provide references and a bibliography. These MUST both be OSCOLA compliant, if you do not you WILL lose marks).