Tanya Chadha practices in the area of litigation, focusing her practice in complex high-value construction, engineering, energy and infrastructure disputes. The majority of Ms. Chadha’s work comprises international, cross-border dispute work with a particular emphasis on international arbitration. She handles disputes across many different jurisdictions including Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Gulf, the Caribbean and South America. Her international arbitration experience includes working under various arbitral conventions and rules including International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR), American Arbitration Association (AAA) and United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).
Ms. Chadha also has notable experience of advising foreign investors in claims against States and Governments under international Bilateral Investment Treaties. On UK matters, Ms. Chadha advises domestic clients on all aspects of construction, engineering, energy and infrastructure matters. She often advises clients on High Court litigation in the Technology & Construction Court (London) and has dealt with numerous adjudications. She also has experience of dealing with certain UK regulatory matters including dealing with the Health & Safety Executive and Environment Agency.
Ms. Chadha acts for clients at all levels of the supply chain in the private sector, including employers, developers, main contractors and specialist sub-contractors. Ms. Chadha’s global infrastructure experience includes both energy and transport infrastructure covering disputes relating to oil pipelines, water mains and utilities, power generation, airport runways, road networks and rail projects. In the commercial arena, she advises on disputes concerning sports stadia, shopping centres, hotels and leisure and large residential developments.
Ms. Chadha also has extensive experience of advising advising public sector clients including Registered Providers (social housing), NHS Trusts (hospitals) and local authorities (schools and city centre regeneration).
Ms. Chadha advises clients on all aspects of the dispute resolution process, including dispute avoidance, adjudication, litigation, international arbitration, mediation and commercial negotiation.
Ms. Chadha has been recognized by Best Lawyers, "Ones to Watch" list for Energy and Natural resources law in 2023.
Ms. Chadha earned an LL.B. from the University of Birmingham, Law; an LL.M. in International Commercial Law from the University of Birmingham; and an LPC from the College of Law.
Areas of Practice
Construction, Engineering, Energy and Infrastructure Disputes
- England and Wales
- College of Law, LPC, with distinction, 2010
- University of Law, Birmingham, LL.M.International Commercial Law, 2009
- University of Law, Birmingham, LL.B., 2008
- Duane Morris
- Associate, 2020-present
- Trowers & Hamlins LLP
- Associate, 2014-2020
- DWF LLP
- Associate, 2013-2014
- Cobbetts LLP
- Associate, 2010-2013
Honors and Awards
- Recognised by Best Lawyers “ones to watch” for 2023 for Energy and Natural Resources Law
- Finalist in "Associate of the Year" category in the Birmingham Law Society Awards 2017
- Co-author, "Super-inflation and the Construction and Energy Sector in the UK," Construction Law, December 2021
- Co-author, "The Root Cause of Evil!" Construction Law, Aug/Sept 2021
- Co-author, "The Cladding Challenge: Silent Killer!" Construction Law, March 2021
- Co-author, "Article 35 Applications Under the ICC Rules," Construction Law, October 2020
- Co-author, "Taxing Times for Construction," Construction Law, May 2020
- Co-author, "Henderson Principle Revisited," Construction Law, May 2020
- Quoted, "COVID-19 Based Contractual Rows Not Inevitable, Claim Lawyers," New Civil Engineer, March 16, 2020
"How much later is 'later'?" Construction Law Journal, June 2019
"Courts prove ready to review arbitral awards," Construction Law Journal, October 2017
"NEC 4 and Managing the Programme," Construction Manager, 5 September 2017
Advised a litigation funder in respect of its potential funding of proposed claims by a Turkish construction company, against a foreign State, associated with various road projects built by the contractor for the government. Construction was disrupted by civil war, leading to claims advanced in arbitration based on Turkey's Bilateral Investment Treaty with the foreign state.
Advised a main contractor in relation to claims against a foreign Insurer relating to various credit insurance policies. The underlying project concerned civil engineering highway works in the Caribbean. The dispute was the subject of high-court proceedings issued in London that would have given rise to new law concerning the interpretation and application of insurance policies and the law of agency, had the matter come to trial; however, the dispute was settled prior to trial.
Advised an international contractor on a payment dispute with the employer arising from an extensive civils job at an airport in Asia. The works were awarded under an amended FIDIC contract. We advised on various options for commencing an arbitration either under the local Arbitration Act or under the ICSID arbitration rules, and assisted the client in procuring government involvement with UK Ministers assisting the parties in seeking to reach an amicable resolution on favourable terms for our client.
Acted for an international main contractor (acting as part of a joint venture) in the construction of an airport in Asia. We advised on complex contractual interpretation issues arising under a FIDIC form of contract as well as on specific issues of dispute arising with the employer to include entitlement to claim additional sums under the contract, potential claims under a bilateral investment treaty between the UK and the foreign state and potential international enforcement issues.
Acted for a US based litigation funder in respect of a European main contractor's final account claim against a Middle Eastern employer for oil pipeline works. The final account claim was in excess of $125m and included various heads of monetary claims, a variation account, delay, disruption and an extension of time. This dispute involved matters of foreign law (including Sharia'a Law).
Acting for a UK-based main contractor in a very large project concerning utility mains upgrades.
Advised a unique city "pod hotel" in the UK following a significant escape of water, in a multi-party claim. The hotel is constructed using modular construction and comprises a number of self-contained, pre-fabricated and pre-wired pods. Advised on the nature and scope of the remedial scheme in conjunction with experts from seven separate disciplines, dealing also with insurance policy coverage and a business interruption claim.
Acted for an international main contractor in multi-party high-court proceedings (London) issued by a championship football club. The claim concerns alleged latent defects in respect of a football stadium and was brought under the terms of a collateral warranty. The complex legal arguments concerned limitation, agency and trusts.
Successfully obtained a same day Order for interim injunctive relief (prohibitory injunction) in the Technology & Construction Court (High Court, London) without notice against a contractor that had made a series of threats to interfere with the employer's properties and remove materials without consent across multiple sites across the country.
Acted for a main contractor (as Responding Party) in three concurrent adjudications issued on the same day. Obtained awards in the client’s favour in two of those recovering circa £1.5m in a matter of days. The Referring Party withdrew from the third adjudication before a decision could be issued; negotiate a settlement the client found favorable.
Advised a sub-contractor on the validity of a main contractor’s standard terms and conditions of sub-contract. Part 8 proceedings for declaratory relief were issued in the TCC, London.
Acted for a contractor in adjudication enforcement proceedings in the Technology and Construction Court, London. The substantive dispute was settled on terms the client found favorable.
Advised a UK local authority in relation to its programme for the removal and replacement of combustible cladding on five residential tower blocks, procured under a unique PFI arrangement, in one of the largest cases to arise out of fire safety investigations post-Grenfell. Advised the client on its evacuation of the blocks, removal of the combustible cladding, subsequent reoccupation of the blocks and its cladding replacement programme. Also advised the client on its funding relationship with the UK government for the cladding replacement works.
Advised a UK housing association in respect of defective cladding installed on a large residential tower block in the UK. We advised the client initially in respect of its claims for government funding, secured all necessary expert evidence to demonstrate that the cladding was defective, advised the client on its programme for removal and replacement of the cladding, and pursued claims on behalf of our client against the cladding contractor for losses incurred in replacing the cladding.
Advised a UK housing provider on regulatory compliance and defect issues concerning Aluminium Composite Material (ACM) cladding installed (by professional appointment) across a number of its high-rise tower block sites. The fire safety issues extended to timber cladding, issues concerning cavity barriers, fire breaks, fire doors, fire alarms and sprinkler systems. The matter involved technical fire engineering and architectural issues regarding combustibility of materials used. Advised the client on the implications for leaseholders arising from the requirement for EWS1 forms and supported our client in liaising and corresponding with affected leaseholders; pursued a claim under a new homes warranty, and a claim under a design and build contract.
Acted for the owner of an iconic skyscraper hotel in the UK in a dispute concerning failures over the curtain wall and a glass paneled façade. The sealing and bonding units were found to be inadequate and significant repair works to the entire façade were deemed necessary, and the client was successful in its claim against the freeholder for an order that repair works were to be carried out.