HIRST LAW — About Martin Hirst

Construction and Engineering

Employers for which Martin has acted include:

A property company defending claims by a civil engineering contractor concerning micro tunneling; and
A sports stadium owner defending a £1.5m payment claim by a main contractor.

Contractors for which he has acted include:

A main contractor in disputes concerning delays and loss and expense in relation to a large retail development.
A main contractor in its dispute with a Swiss bank arising out of a performance bond.
A main contractor in claim for repayment of liquidated damages in respect of the £11m refurbishment of a hospital clinic.
A major international construction company on a large adjudication concerning a retail scheme.
A major contractor in relation to a claim arising from the Jubilee Line extension.
A main contractor in relation to a claim regarding marine construction works and claims under the NEC 3.
A major contractor in a multi-million pound adjudication on a high profile commercial national retail scheme.

Sub-contractors for which he has acted include:

A sub-contractor in an adjudication concerning payment claims arising out of electrical works on the Metropolitan Line.
A roofing sub-contractor in claims against a large main contractor.

Arbitration

Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb) Business Arbitration Scheme Panel Arbitrator.

Commercial Litigation

Martin has acted for various clients, including:

A bloodstock agent in defence of claims brought by a former client.
A firm of solicitors in a trial concerning wasted costs.
A traffic management company in dispute over scope of VAT.

Energy and Resources

Martin has acted for a wide range of clients in disputes arising out of the design and construction of off shore installations all over the world, including:

An energy services contractor in a £3m payment dispute in relation to a high-pressure steam pipeline.
An engineering consultancy providing advice on petrochemical installations in the Middle East.
A supplier of containers to the offshore industry against an oilfield services company in a substantial sale of goods dispute.