EDITOR'S NOTES | Issue 5-24
publication date: Jun 10, 2007
Postmortem justifications for work not performed to contract specs are rarely effective ways to please a project owner. As Napoleon Hill, best-selling author of Think and Grow Rich, said, “The best job goes to the person who can get it done without passing the buck or coming back with excuses.” A contractor’s reasonings for deviating from contract specifications on a government project (as well as its proposed methods to rectify the discrepancies) do not find sympathy with the Army Corps of Engineers or the ASBCA, as is shown in this week’s first case.
This week’s other two cases share a common thread—both question whether one party has the right to sue the other. In one, the initial agreement was technically illegal. Could one party sue the other for a subsequent agreement that was based on the illegal contract? In the other, the plaintiff did not exist when the original work was performed. Could it sue a manufacturer for a faulty product? In both cases, the answer is yes.
This page is available to members only.
To subscribe, click
here
Construction Claims Online Features and Benefits
Whether your role in the construction claims process is as a building owner, designer, contractor, facility manager, attorney or consultant, you will want to keep up with the latest developments in construction law, federal and state policy, construction process and best practices.
Whether you sign up for our free or paid content, Construction Claims Online provides information you need to achieve successful outcomes for project issues and your clients' best interests.
Avoid costly errors by understanding how the boards and courts look at typical disputes situations.
Achieve successful project outcomes.
Defend against unsubstantiated claims.
Reduce or eliminate risks.
