Volume 7 - Number 5 | February 2, 2009
Recent Issues
EDITOR'S NOTES | Volume 7 - Number 5
It’s not every day that a contractor can successfully argue for compensation of lost potential profits, even if that lost revenue was a direct result of a wrongfully terminated public contract. In the culmination of a dispute that the Advisor originally presented two years ago, the Colorado Supreme Court overturned an appellate ruling by determining that the contractor could pursue prospective lost profits that occurred because of its lost bonding capacity.
This week’s second case is a twist on a perpetual problem in the construction industry – verbal contracts. In this latest iteration, a subcontractor proposed using a standard AIA contract, but the parties never actually signed it. When a jobsite injury occurred that gave rise to a lawsuit against the prime contractor, it relied on the contract for indemnity. The court, however, said the argument failed because the contract was never signed.
The final case is a lesson in following directions. When considered as a whole, a bid proposal for an Army Corps of Engineers project contained the information requested by the RFP. But, it lacked the certified documentation required by the solicitation and was therefore rejected as technically unacceptable.
COLORADO HIGH COURT ALLOWS RECOVERY OF IMPAIRED BONDING CAPACITY DAMAGES
A wrongly terminated contractor can pursue lost profits from a public owner after it loses its bonding capacity as a result of the termination.
WORK PERFORMED WITHOUT SIGNED CONTRACT LEADS TO INDEMNITY PROBLEMS
Terms of a verbal contract are open to debate when the work is performed without the benefit of a signed contract.
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION DID NOT SATISFY CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT
Narratives and inferences in a bid proposal do not meet the requirements of the solicitation to provide documented certifications of past work.
