Carlo Taczalski

Construction & Engineering

Carlo has been recognised as a Leading Individual in this area by the Legal 500 since 2018.

Many of Carlo’s commercial instructions are in the context of construction, engineering and energy (including PFI and PPP) disputes.  Carlo’s expertise in construction, insurance and professional negligence makes an excellent choice where the issues involved in the case straddle those different traditional specialisms; a number of Carlo’s instructions are therefore in cases where issues of negligence and / or breach of contract overlap with questions of insurance coverage, including in a construction context.

In addition to appearing in Court, Carlo is adept at dealing with disputes in arbitration, adjudication or mediation. He has recently been instructed by a well-known contractor in a series of adjudications, where the difference in the parties’ valuations of the work undertaken on the subcontract is in the region of £3m; by a main MEP contractor on an adjudication with the difference between the parties in excess of £1.5m arising out of the building of a tower block near Canary Wharf; and by a well-known groundworks contractor on a series of disputes with a well-known contractor in connection with various housing developments in the North, as well as in many other disputes.

As well as appearing in adjudications, Carlo is a TECBAR accredited Adjudicator

Carlo is the author of the chapter about the NHBC in Emden’s Construction Law.

Selected Cases

• BNP v Briggs & Forrester Engineering Services Limited – Following a Shorter Trial Scheme Trial, Carlo obtained declarations that the defendant contractor repudiated its contract by purporting to terminate where it was not entitled to do so, allowing Carlo’s client to claim damages knowing that liability is already established.
• Development finance – Sole counsel bringing a claim for alleged repudiatory breach of a £130M development finance agreement.
• AZ v BY [2023 EWHC 2388 (TCC) – Carlo represented the successful Part 8 Claimant / Part 7 Defendant in what is thought to be the first case in England and Wales in which an adjudicator’s decision has been declared unenforceable for apparent bias, after one party placed without prejudice material before the adjudicator.
• Architect’s dispute with Oxbridge College – Together with Ben Quiney KC, Carlo successfully defended an architect’s practice in a £9M adjudication brought by an Oxbridge College in relation to the renovation of one of its main listed courts.
• Sole counsel for the successful applicants in AIG Europe v McCormick which has re-stated the correct approach to substituting parties after the expiry of a limitation period.
• Electrical works at London Bridge Station – Carlo was instructed for one of the parties in relation to aspects of electrical work carried out on the redevelopment of London Bridge Station. The dispute settled confidentially.
• Property development arbitration – Carlo successfully represented a developer as sole counsel in an arbitration concerning the amount payable under a joint venture agreement for the development of houses in London. The dispute was put at about £2m.
• Water treatment arbitration – Instructed as sole counsel in arbitral proceedings concerning a water treatment plant in Eastern Europe, which is said to have been defectively constructed and / or designed (the claim is put at circa Euro 2m).
• Landmark Limited & Woods Development Limited v American International Bank (In receivership) – This was a Privy Council appeal from the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal; it concerned the basis on which the Appellants were entitled to charge and claim for electricity which they had provided following the inability of the Antiguan statutory provider to meet the Respondent’s needs. Carlo was instructed with Kim Franklin KC for the successful Appellants.
• Antigua Power Company Limited v The Attorney General of Antigua & Barbuda & Others – Claim for approximately £100m in the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court. It arose out of a breach by the Antiguan Government of a Joint Venture Agreement to build a power-plant in Antigua. The Privy Council upheld APCL’s claim for breach of contract in 2013 (the report is at [2013] UKPC 23), and remitted the assessment of damages to the Antiguan High Court. Carlo was instructed on the assessment of damages trial with Kim Franklin KC and Dane Hamilton KC.
• Antigua Power Company Limited v The Attorney General of Antigua & Barbuda & Others – Carlo was also instructed (with Geoffrey Robertson KC and Kim Franklin KC) on a further claim on behalf of APCL claiming substantial damages as a result of a conspiracy to cause loss by unlawful means in Antigua.

News

• Carlo Taczalski successful in obtaining declarations that City Tower Unit Trust was entitled to terminate Briggs & Forrester’s contract for repudiatory breach
• Carlo Taczalski successfully resists short notice freezing injunction: IBMG Ltd and others v McKeon, Williams and others

Read more

Articles

• DIPT v Sanglier v Apollo: the importance of assessing the evidence, settling reasonably, and understanding the terms on which you contract
• Carlo Taczalski and Frederick Simpson are successful in the Court of Appeal Cross-undertakings have little place in the security for costs regime

Read more

Events

• Carlo Taczalski to speak at London Build 2021 Expo
• Carlo Taczalski will be speaking at “Cash Is King – Payments and Changes in Tax Laws” webinar by Decipher Group

Qualifications

• Queen Mother Scholarship, Middle Temple (2010)
• Harmsworth Entrance Exhibition, Middle Temple (2010)
• Lovells Examination Prize, Downing College (2006)
• PricewaterhouseCoopers Scholarship (2005 – 2007)
• MA (Cantab.) (2008)

Memberships

• CLCBAR
• COMBAR
• TECBAR
• PNBA