The question
Should ancient stadiums and arenas be written off as relics of times gone by, or can they be developed or repurposed, to capitalize on their deep history? How do modern stadium construction projects differ from those of the past? Are we just dressing up old principles in new jargon? What lessons, if indeed any, can we draw from these historic marvels when tackling today's complex stadium projects? How does the legal context compare?
The answer
In June 2024, I visited the Ancient Olympic Stadium of Rhodes in June 2024. Soon after, I attended the prestigious Stadium Business Summit ("SBS") at Emirates Old Trafford, Manchester. The SBS included an exclusive tour of the AO Arena and Manchester City FC’s Etihad Stadium, which gave rise to my previous article setting out some of the key themes considered at the SBS. Among these was the principle that modern stadiums, with their cutting-edge technology, can be "flipped" to serve multiple purposes. This allows them to be "sweated", to maximise return on investment.
Whilst sadly unable to attend the SBS this year, I was able to continue my (seemingly annual) stadium tour, with a trip to Athens, and a visit to iconic venues such as the Panathenaic Stadium, the Odeon of Herodes Atticus and the Lycabettus Theatre. Superficially, such ancient venues appear antiquated and obsolete compared to cutting-edge stadiums such as the Etihad. However, in marvelling at these ancient structures shown in the pictures below, and how they have stood the test of time, I was struck by some of the questions mentioned above.
Can stadiums be repurposed and revived?
My trip to Athens brought a number of points into sharp focus. Among them, whilst such stadiums, arenas and venues might appear decrepit and worn-out, the truth is that venues such as those in Athens remain a 'hot spot' for some of the leading sporting events and performers across the world. The Panathenaic Stadium began as a race course, later hosted the opening and closing ceremonies of the first modern Olympic Games in 1896, and eventually became an Olympic venue in 2004. Tangible proof, it would seem, that it is possible to "teach an old dog new tricks", capitalising on old age by repurposing venues, and turning old age from irrelevance to a unique selling point. Each venue's history and character therefore becomes an asset. Imagine, witnessing a performance of your favourite modern-day sports team, artists and performers, in a venue that gives you the 'feel' of ancient Greece.
Some TLC might be required to maintain the joints of such aged structures, but their comparatively rudimentary technology stands strong today. Ancient stadiums continue to serve as the bedrock of modern-day stadium innovation, and the principles established by the visionaries that designed and constructed them remain fundamental in stadium projects. For instance – sightlines. These are now mastered to a fine art, using complex measurements such as 'C values', calculated forensically for each row of seating and accounting for numerous variables. However, similar methods were drawn upon in the earliest developments of the Panathenaic Stadium, with its 'U' shape and subtly adjusted tiered seating, to improve sightlines.
Stadium regeneration – What is the legal context and its implications?
Centuries separate Herodes Atticus from today’s projects and their funders, but many of the legal challenges remain strikingly similar. Stadiums remain a breathing part of the landscape in which they rest, meaning they require appropriate contractual arrangements (e.g., Public-private partnerships), are subject to political scrutiny, and must be robustly governed as they have been in times gone by – though thankfully for Herodes Atticus, he did not need to manage a Facebook account!
Modern construction contracts may be more sophisticated, with JCT, NEC, and FIDIC suites offering tailored solutions, but the core issues of risk allocation, design responsibility, and financial security are timeless. Collateral warranties, bonds, and guarantees are today’s equivalents of ancient patronage, ensuring that the stakeholders of these projects such as funders have sufficient contractual protection.
For clients, contractors and consultants, construction contracts outline fundamental principles, including obligations regarding the standard of workmanship or skill and care to be exercised. They also prescribe the circumstances which may give rise to additional time and/or money, together with the relevant timeframes and procedures necessary to secure the same. DWF is routinely instructed in relation to multi-million-pound stadium projects which are in difficulty, the majority of which have very similar features.
Poorly drafted (or indeed entirely absent) construction contracts cause untold problems for all construction professionals, by failing to adequately address fundamental principles and obligations such as those relating to design, payment, extensions of time and additional costs. Construction contracts should be drafted carefully to include cogent, robust terms which accurately reflect the commercially agreed position as regards the allocation of risk. For example, when considering the pricing strategy, appropriate advice should be sought on 'red line' clauses which seek to impose caps on the sum of the contract, pricing, the extent of liability or any other such matters.
A further example arises when considering design liability. Provisions concerning design, and the means to propose changes to design for acceptance, must be mutually understood and agreed, to mitigate the risk of significant project delays and cost overruns caused by extensive changes/variations. A final example can be found in the repurposing and/or regeneration of stadiums. Which party bears the risk as to what can and cannot be retained from these historic structures? Whilst this may closely relate to design liability, there will inevitably be a need to ascertain the existing status of the aged stadium, together with the extent to which it is fit for the new purpose. Discharging contractual obligations owed in this context will give rise to site investigations and site data, in respect of which the risk must be allocated and managed.
Though many core risks are similar to those in historic projects, the modern legal context has some significant differences. Gone are the days of handshake deals and direct awards. Today, construction professionals must partake in the jousting of modern-day tender processes (particularly for publicly funded projects), in the interests of transparency and equitability. They must also navigate a labyrinth of procurement / project delivery options and processes, dispute resolution mechanisms, and compliance requirements.
The construction legal sphere is also now replete with technical jargon, rigged to cause confusion. It requires specifically tailored, strategic advice and contracts to steer a project from its inception, through the construction phase and soundly to completion. DWF can provide the relevant practical, commercially focused advice to assist.
.Stephen McGuiganIf you would like to discuss the article further please contact
