Home / People / Matthew Taylor
Portrait of Matthew Taylor

Matthew Taylor


CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP
Cannon Place
78 Cannon Street
United Kingdom
Languages English

Matthew is a Partner in the Energy, Projects and Construction group. He specialises in dispute resolution and has experience of litigation, arbitration, adjudication and a wide range of forms of ADR.

Matthew also regularly provides live project advice to help clients effectively manage risk on their projects. He also has a particular expertise in dealing with complex, high value delay cases.

more less

‘delves into the detail quickly’.

Legal 500, 2017

Clients say that he is "very good when you need a detailed lawyer on complex disputes," and add "He demonstrates a genuine understanding of the business and the wider context of the advice he gives."

Legal 500, 2020

Relevant experience

  • The developer of a high-end mixed use development in Birmingham on disputes arising out of delays to the refurbishment of the development and the termination of the main contractor. The dispute was the subject of reported adjudication enforcement proceedings and a subsequent stay application.
  • The developer of a prestigious London office building on claims arising out of defects in the water system discovered during commissioning and the associated delays to completion. The case involved managing the resolution of defects before completion, an adjudication in relation to liquidate damages and subsequent insurance claims.
  • The owner of a c900,000 square foot warehouse, let as the largest wine bottling facility in Europe, on claims arising out of defective piling and floor slabs. This was the largest dispute in the Technology and Construction Court in 2014.
  • A client on all aspects of the delay case arising out of the construction of (at the time) the largest off-shore wind farm in the UK. This c$500m dispute was the subject of a five week LCIA arbitration hearing and a three week counter claim hearing.
  • The developer / owner of a major retail development on defective cladding works and implementing an investigatory regime, remedial scheme and claims strategy.
  • A major UK contractor on live project issues regarding a number of its central London projects;providing strategic project advice and dealing with the resolution of disputes through adjudication and ADR.
  • A major UK contractor on a number of sub-contractor disputes arising out of the construction of a new super prison.
  • Private individuals on claims arising out of delays to the construction of both new build and refurbished high-end residential properties in central and west London.
  • A tenant on claims against its landlord arising out of the delay in completion and defective construction of a major central London office development.
  • Multiplex Construction on disputes arising out of the construction of Wembley National Stadium, specifically in relation to a c£45m sub-contract package.
  • A wide range of employers / developers advising on disputes relating to the delay in completion of office, mixed use and retail developments and associated defective works.
more less

Memberships & Roles

  • TeCSA
  • Society of Construction Law
more less


  • 2000 – LLB (Hons), University of Leeds, Leeds
  • 2001 – LPC, Nottingham Law School, Nottingham
  • 2010 – MSc Construction Law and Dispute Resolution, Kings's College, London
more less


Li­quid­ated dam­ages and par­tial pos­ses­sion
A re­cent TCC de­cision has en­forced a li­quid­ated dam­ages clause which did not al­low for a pro­por­tion­ate re­duc­tion in li­quid­ated dam­ages fol­low­ing par­tial pos­ses­sion of com­pleted sec­tions of a de­vel­op­ment...
How far are ad­ju­dic­a­tion de­cisions bind­ing on sub­sequent ad­ju­dic­at­ors? 
A re­cent TCC de­cision has con­sidered the ex­tent to which ad­ju­dic­a­tion de­cisions are bind­ing on a sub­sequent ad­ju­dic­at­ors. In this par­tic­u­lar case, an ini­tial ad­ju­dic­a­tion de­cision which awar­ded an ex­ten­sion...
The rise of the glob­al ex­pert ser­vices prac­tice: Court of Ap­peal guid­ance...
A Court of Ap­peal de­cision earli­er this week has up­held an in­junc­tion gran­ted by the TCC pre­vent­ing an in­ter­na­tion­al ex­pert ser­vices firm from act­ing for more than one party to an in­ter­na­tion­al con­struc­tion...
As­sign­ment of sub-con­tracts on ter­min­a­tion: con­tract­ors be­ware 
A re­cent TCC de­cision has con­sidered the ef­fect of pro­vi­sions which re­quire con­tract­ors to as­sign sub-con­tracts on ter­min­a­tion for de­fault by an em­ploy­er. The court’s de­cision meant that the con­tract­or...
Ac­cept­ance test­ing and the de­fer­ral of ter­min­a­tion rights
A re­cent TCC de­cision has con­sidered the abil­ity of an em­ploy­er to de­fer ex­er­cising rights of ter­min­a­tion in the event a con­tract­or fails to sat­is­fy ac­cept­ance test­ing cri­ter­ia. It is of­ten as­sumed that...
Do En­ergy from Waste plants fall with­in the Con­struc­tion Act?
A re­cent TCC de­cision has con­sidered wheth­er En­ergy from Waste plants fall with­in the power gen­er­a­tion ex­emp­tion in sec­tion 105 of the Hous­ing Grants, Con­struc­tion and Re­gen­er­a­tion Act 1998 (the “Con­struc­tion...
Fi­nal dates for pay­ment linked to in­voices fall foul of the Con­struc­tion...
A re­cently pub­lished TCC de­cision has found that fi­nal dates for pay­ment must be a fixed peri­od of time from the due date un­der a con­struc­tion con­tract. The court held that a pro­vi­sion which made the...
Put­ting off the evil day: con­trac­tu­al re­sponse peri­ods and the crys­tal­lisa­tion...
A re­cent TCC de­cision has con­sidered the ef­fect of con­trac­tu­al re­sponse peri­ods on the crys­tal­lisa­tion of a con­struc­tion dis­pute for the pur­pose of ad­ju­dic­a­tion. This case con­siders the re­sponse peri­od...
The use of ex­perts in in­ter­na­tion­al con­struc­tion dis­putes: con­flicts of...
A re­cent de­cision of the Tech­no­logy and Con­struc­tion Court ap­pears to be the first re­por­ted Eng­lish de­cision to up­hold a fi­du­ciary duty of loy­alty in an ex­pert wit­ness ap­point­ment. The find­ing in this...
Ad­ju­dic­a­tion in­junc­tions: will Cov­id-19 de­vel­op the law?
The first re­cor­ded case of an ad­ju­dic­a­tion in­junc­tion sought as a res­ult of the Cov­id-19 pan­dem­ic emerged earli­er this month in the TCC. The law as to such in­junc­tions is presently un­settled. In this...
The TCC opens the door (slightly) for ad­ju­dic­a­tion pro­ceed­ings by com­pan­ies...
A re­cent TCC de­cision has provided fur­ther guid­ance on a li­quid­at­or’s op­tions when seek­ing pay­ments owed to in­solv­ent com­pan­ies through ad­ju­dic­a­tion and the in­ter­play with the In­solv­ency Rules. The...
Delay ana­lys­is un­der the mi­cro­scope: com­mon sense wins out over meth­od­o­logy
A de­cision of an Aus­trali­an court last month has con­sidered the evid­en­tial re­quire­ments for prov­ing delay claims in con­struc­tion dis­putes. The de­cision com­ments on the rel­ev­ance of the 2nd Edi­tion of...