Joe Mills

“Has an excellent understanding of this area and gets to the real issues quickly and puts clients at east” – Legal 500

Associate, Construction and Engineering
Leeds, UK

Expertise

Joe is a solicitor specialising in contentious construction and engineering matters. His commitment to supporting clients through complex disputes in the construction and engineering sector has been recognised by The Legal 500.

Based in Leeds, Joe advises clients in the UK and internationally on all aspects of construction and engineering projects, from risk management, advisory and mitigation through to formal dispute resolution. He has particular experience in the engineering, infrastructure and energy sectors, where his work on technically complex matters enables him to respond effectively to the specific challenges of each project. Joe is familiar with—and has acted for clients in disputes concerning—all major standard forms of contract, including JCT, NEC, FIDIC and ICE.

Joe brings a practical, personable and commercially focused approach to the matters in which he is involved. He is experienced in deploying a range of technologies, including e-discovery platforms in both arbitral and court proceedings, giving clients a clear advantage in document-intensive disputes. Central to Joe’s approach is working closely with client teams, stakeholders and project teams — not simply acting for them, but operating and working alongside them.

Joe has acted for clients across a broad range of sectors, including:

Engineering and infrastructure
Energy
Petrochemicals
Telecoms and utilities
Aviation

Examples of matters Joe has been involved in include:

Advising national and international entities in a multi-party dispute concerning defective fuel tanks at a major UK airport.
Assisting national contractors engaged in rail and highway infrastructure works, including disputes concerning defective design and workmanship, as well as substantial compensation event entitlement determinations.
Acting for nationally recognised main contractors in legacy disputes relating to cladding works across facilities intended for medical research.
Representing a leading UK recycling, waste and resource management contractor in disputes arising from industrial regeneration and the adaptive reuse of legacy furnace and waste-disposal technologies.

Joe advises clients across a range of dispute resolution forums, including adjudication, domestic and international arbitration, Technology and Construction Court proceedings, and expert determination.

His experience includes advising and representing clients on issues such as defective works, delay, contractual interpretation, payment cycle disputes, adjudication enforcement, professional negligence and liability, and breaches of design obligations.

Experience

Haase Environmental Consulting GmbH v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd – Acting for the Defendant / Counterclaimant in a termination dispute arising out of the Claimant’s appointment as process plant engineer in relation to an EPC Contract for a waste-to-energy plant with a combined value exceeding £10m.
Grain Communications Limited v Shepherd Groundworks Limited – Representing the Claimant in Part 8 proceedings concerning contractual interpretation of provisions relating to the Claimant’s entitlement to terminate works called-off under a wider framework agreement and the interaction of those provisions with the imposition of terms contrary to express provisions of the contract and limitations to the recovery of damages.
CNO Plant Hire Ltd v Caldwell Construction Limited – Acting for and advising the Claimant in enforcement proceedings where the questions before the Court included whether an adjudicator had jurisdiction to undertake a true-value determination where an immediate payment obligation existed (including whether a notified sum had arisen in the payment cycle in question) and whether the Defendant was entitled to offset sums allegedly owed pursuant to a later unpaid adjudication decision without commencing its own enforcement action.
Bexhill Construction Ltd v Kingsmead Homes Ltd – Representing the successful Claimant in enforcing an adjudicator’s decision which awarded sums on a ‘smash and grab’ basis where enforcement was resisted on grounds of jurisdiction and/or breach of natural justice. Concurrently, the Defendant sought a stay of enforcement in any event, alleging the Claimant was impecunious and would be unable to repay any sums awarded in the event the dispute was eventually determined in the Defendant’s favour.

Publications