May 21, 2007

EDITOR'S NOTES

The “measured mile” approach to determining the validity of claims has long been an acceptable method in the construction industry. It is founded on a reliable baseline, and to be an admissible argument, the calculations must be an accurate reflection of “normal” conditions. Government boards of contract appeals widely accept this method, as evidenced in this week’s first case. However, the ASBCA instructs the parties in this case to recalculate the damages because of the contractor’s on-the-job learning curve. This is a second issue in a case we presented last week.

The second case considers the problems that occur when a contractor gives the wrong schedule to its subcontractor. When the sub loses money because of delays caused by conflicting information, who is liable? In this scenario, the contractor is responsible.

Finally, a project owner finds itself shortchanged when its project engineer issues flawed design plans. Because of a limitation of liability clause, the owner can only pursue reimbursement for the original fee, nothing more.

Subscribers: click here for the full story

Non-Subscribers: click here to subscribe