By Bruce Jervis
Active or intentional interference by the project owner with the contractor’s work is a widely recognized exception to the enforceability of no-damage-for-delay clauses. The Texas Supreme Court recently joined the national trend in expressly adopting this exception for private and public construction contracts alike. In so doing, however, the court left open the question of intent.
The question is whether the project owner must intend to delay or disrupt the contractor’s work, or, does the owner merely need to take an affirmative step that has the foreseeable effect of delaying the contractor? The Texas court said public policy prohibits a party from intentionally injuring the other party to a contract. The court spoke of “willful acts” and “bad faith.” The court then muddied the water by referring to “negligence” and “omissions.” ... Read more.
Featured in this Week’s Construction Claims Advisor:
- Intentional Interference Ruled Exception to Delay Disclaimers in Texas
- Apportionment of Lien Claim by Square Footage Upheld
By Steve Rizer
Courts and board decisions are narrowing the coverage of the Differing Site Conditions (DSC) clause, Navigant Construction Forum (NCF) Executive Director James Zack reported both during a recent WPL Publishing webinar and in a new 32-page NCF research perspective. He noted that this trend is “making it much more difficult for contractors to recover damages.” And, it is a trend that NCF believes, “barring a watershed case concerning [DSC] claims,” likely will continue. Click here to read the steps that Zack and NCF urged contractors to take amid the current DSC environment.
By Steve Rizer
There are some interesting results to report regarding a recent study of wireless sensor networks for indoor construction operations -- results that are expected to provide a reference for future research on the selection of indoor positioning technologies. To see some of these results, click here.