American Bar Association
Forum on the Construction Industry
______________________________________________________________________________
Drafting and Negotiating the “New” Key
Contract Clauses
Daniel M.
Drewry, Esq.
Drewry Simmons Vornehm, LLP
and
Carrie L. Ciliberto, Esq.
The Associated General Contractors of
Presented at the 2009 Fall Meeting
“Drafting and Negotiating the ‘New’ Key Contract Clauses”
October 15-16, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________
©2009 American Bar Association
Table of Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . 1
§ 1 Standard of
Care . . . . . . . . . 2
§ 2 Warranty
Obligations & Performance Guarantees . . . . 4
§ 3 Changes . . . . . . . . . . 13
§ 4 Differing
Site Conditions . . . . . . . 18
§ 5 Limitations
of Liability . . . . . . . . 27
Waiver
of Consequential Damages . . . . . . 27
“No
Damages for Delay” . . . . . . . 29
Indemnity
Provisions . . . . . . . . 31
§ 6 Force Majeure . . . . . . . . . 38
§ 7 Price
Escalation . . . . . . . . . 41
§ 8 Liquidated
Damages . . . . . . . . 42
§ 9 Incentives . . . . . . . . . . 44
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . 46
Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . 47
Introduction
Negotiating and drafting a construction contract is an exercise in risk allocation. In order to allocate that risk, the construction lawyer must first be able to identify and understand the risks likely to be encountered. The ability to do this effectively, whether as outside or in-house counsel, is driven not simply by a familiarity with construction law, but by a fuller understanding of your client’s business operations and the project itself. A detailed risk identification and assessment exercise with counsel early in project development will flush out not only the legal questions, but also those business risks and issues inherent to a given project. By doing so, all participants are better informed at the outset of the project, the contract will likely better serve the parties, and the odds are enhanced that the participants’ anticipated benefits and goals from the transaction will be met, including the final cost of construction resembling the original price of the contract.
In the companion presentation and discussion to this
article, we will hear from an experienced panel as to the risk assessment
techniques and philosophies implemented by AEC companies and how they seek to
manage the contract process on a given project.
The proliferation of industry standard form contracts has a direct and,
often times, significant impact on these risk assessment techniques,
philosophies and management processes because each set of industry forms comes
from a different drafting perspective.
In negotiating and drafting the construction contract,
however, whether under the “new” forms or custom documents, certain key clauses
and issues consistently put all of this to the test. This companion paper will examine these “key
clauses” with the goal of explaining the attendant issues and drafting
considerations for each from the view of both the owner and contractor. Additionally, excerpts from the following
three families of industry standard forms are provided to show how contract templates
have tried to address the same clauses:
ConsensusDOCSTM, a coalition of 22 leading construction
industry associations; the American Institute of Architects (AIA) and the
Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee (EJCDC).
§ 1 Standard of Care
For attorneys, the term “standard of care” carries
particular significance. More often than
not, we view “standard of care” in connection with the design professional and
its performance, or lack thereof, in completing the design services for the
Project. Contractors are typically not
held to professional standards of care.
Rather, they are subject to the contractual warranty or guaranty of
performance covering the quality of their work, which is discussed in the
following section.
Generally, design professionals are held to a “professional
negligence” standard of care in performing the design services unless the
contract expressly states otherwise. The
AIA family of documents has consistently utilized this common law approach to
govern the performance of design services.[1] This trend has continued in the new AIA 2007
documents, but for the first time the AIA has expressly adopted this
professional standard of care in its basic Owner-Architect Agreement
(B101-2007):
AIA – B101 (2007), § 2.2 The Architect shall perform its services
consistent with the professional skill and care ordinarily provided by
architects practicing in the same or similar locality under the same or similar
circumstances. The Architect shall perform
its services as expeditiously as is consistent with such professional skill and
care and the orderly progress of the Project.
As such, the AIA
documents do not specify a different or higher, contractual standard of care
other than professional skill and care.
The ConsensusDOCS take a slightly different approach.[2] Rather than simply rely on the “professional
negligence” standard, the ConsensusDOCS take the further step of contractually
establishing or articulating the fiduciary obligation owed by the design
professional to the Owner (or Design/Builder depending on the relationship) in
the performance of its services. The
EJCDC documents likewise adopt prevailing common law principles in their
contractual standards of care for the performance of design services.[3]
As the complexity and cost of construction increases, many owners
seek increased performance guarantees with respect to the performance of design
services (not to mention construction).
As a result, some owners attempt to ratchet up the common law
“professional negligence” standard included in most of the industry forms. However, design professionals must tread
carefully in this area, as a heightened standard of care may take it outside of
its errors and omission coverage. If the
design professional accepts this increased risk, it must be careful in
structuring the remainder of the agreement (and its insurance) to limit or
manage the risk appropriately. From the
owner’s point of view, the higher performance guaranty, while seemingly adding
protection against loss, may fail its purpose by leaving the owner with an
uninsured loss.
Additionally, as collaborative project delivery methods gain
footholds in the industry, and emerging technologies such as Building
Information Modeling achieve the wide-ranging use anticipated by many experts,
the contractual “standard of care” will evolve and adapt. These changes must be taken into account when
negotiating and drafting the agreements.
Particular attention should be given when developing a Construction
Manager at Risk (CM at Risk) contractual relationship. The contractor’s standard of care
requirements become immensely important to define with regard to
preconstruction activities, as well as when the owner and CM relationship
changes as the project moves from the design phase to the construction phase.
§ 2 Warranty Obligations & Performance
Guaranties
The warranty provision is the contractual representation made by the contractor
or subcontractor as to the quality of its work.
Each of the industry standard forms contains provisions addressing the
contractor’s warranty obligations and correction of work guarantee.
In the ConsensusDOCS 200, the
Contractor warrants “to the Owner and Architect that materials and equipment
furnished under the Contract will be of good quality and new unless the
Contract Documents require or permit otherwise.
The Contractor further warrants that the Work will conform to the
requirements of the Contract Documents and will be free from defects, except
for those inherent in the quality of the Work the Contract Documents require or
permit.”[4] Additionally, the Contractor has the
obligation to obtain from the Material Suppliers and Subcontractors “any
special or extended warranties required by the Contract Documents.” However, the Contractor’s liability regarding
such warranties is limited to the one-year period detailed in the Correction of
Work section (see next paragraph), but that after said period the Contractor
shall “provide reasonable assistance to the Owner in enforcing the obligations
of Subcontractors or Material Suppliers.”[5] The ConsensusDOCS warranty
terms provide:
§3.8 WARRANTY
§3.8.1 The Contractor
warrants that all materials and equipment shall be new unless otherwise
specified, of good quality, in conformance with the Contract Documents, and
free from defective workmanship and materials. At the Owner's request, the
Contractor shall furnish satisfactory evidence of the quality and type of
materials and equipment furnished. The Contractor further warrants that the
Work shall be free from material defects not intrinsic in the design or
materials required in the Contract Documents. The Contractor's warranty does
not include remedies for defects or damages caused by normal wear and tear
during normal usage, use for a purpose for which the Project was not intended,
improper or insufficient maintenance, modifications performed by the Owner or
Others, or abuse. The Contractor's warranty pursuant to this Paragraph 3.8
shall commence on the Date of Substantial Completion.
§3.8.2 The Contractor
shall obtain from its Subcontractors and Material Suppliers any special or
extended warranties required by the Contract Documents. All such warranties
shall be listed in an attached Exhibit to this Agreement. Contractor's
liability for such warranties shall be limited to the one-year correction
period referred to in Paragraph 3.9. After that period Contractor shall assign
them to the Owner and provide reasonable assistance to the Owner in enforcing
the obligations of Subcontractors or Material Suppliers.
The ConsensusDOCS 200 also provides
for a notice and correction period of any defects found “prior to Substantial
Completion and within one year after the date of Substantial Completion of the
Work…”, often times referred to as the “call-back” warranty.[6] If within the warranty period, and upon
proper notification, the Contractor “shall promptly correct the Defective Work
at it own cost and time and bear the expense of additional services required…”[7] Of course, this one-year correction of work
period, or “call-back” warranty does not “constitute a limitation period with
respect to the enforcement of the Contractor's other obligations under the
Contract Documents.”[8] Also, § 3.10 addresses the correction of
covered or in-place work.
ConsensusDOCS - §3.9 CORRECTION OF WORK WITHIN ONE YEAR
§3.9.1 If, prior to
Substantial Completion and within one year after the date of Substantial
Completion of the Work, any Defective Work is found, the Owner shall promptly
notify the Contractor in writing. Unless the Owner provides written acceptance
of the condition, the Contractor shall promptly correct the Defective Work at
its own cost and time and bear the expense of additional services required for
correction of any Defective Work for which it is responsible. If within the
one-year correction period the Owner discovers and does not promptly notify the
Contractor or give the Contractor an opportunity to test or correct Defective
Work as reasonably requested by the Contractor, the Owner waives the
Contractor's obligation to correct that Defective Work as well as the Owner's
right to claim a breach of the warranty with respect to that Defective Work.
§3.9.2 With respect to
any portion of Work first performed after Substantial Completion, the one-year
correction period shall be extended by the period of time between Substantial
Completion and the actual performance of the later Work. Correction periods
shall not be extended by corrective work performed by the Contractor.
§3.9.3 If the
Contractor fails to correct Defective Work within a reasonable time after
receipt of written notice from the Owner prior to final payment, the Owner may
correct it in accordance with the Owner's right to carry out the Work in
Paragraph 11.2. In such case, an appropriate Change Order shall be issued
deducting the cost of correcting such deficiencies from payments then or
thereafter due the Contractor. If payments then or thereafter due Contractor
are not sufficient to cover such amounts, the Contractor shall pay the
difference to the Owner.
§3.9.4 If after the
one-year correction period but before the applicable limitation period the
Owner discovers any Defective Work, the Owner shall, unless the Defective Work
requires emergency correction, promptly notify the Contractor. If the
Contractor elects to correct the Work, it shall provide written notice of such
intent within fourteen (14) Days of its receipt of notice from the Owner. The
Contractor shall complete the correction of Work within a mutually agreed
timeframe. If the Contractor does not
elect to correct the Work, the Owner may have the Work corrected by itself or
Others and charge the Contractor for the reasonable cost of the
correction. Owner shall provide
Contractor with an accounting of correction costs it incurs.
§3.9.5 If the
Contractor's correction or removal of Defective Work causes damage to or
destroys other completed or partially completed Work or existing buildings, the
Contractor shall be responsible for the cost of correcting the destroyed or
damaged property.
§3.9.6 The one-year
period for correction of Defective Work does not constitute a limitation period
with respect to the enforcement of the Contractor's other obligations under the
Contract Documents.
§3.9.7 Prior to final
payment, at the Owner's option and with the Contractor's agreement, the Owner
may elect to accept Defective Work rather than require its removal and
correction. In such case the Contract
Price shall be equitably adjusted for any diminution in the value of the
Project caused by such Defective Work.
ConsensusDOCS - §3.10 CORRECTION OF COVERED WORK
§3.10.1 On request of
the Owner, Work that has been covered without a requirement that it be
inspected prior to being covered may be uncovered for the Owner's
inspection. The Owner shall pay for the
costs of uncovering and replacement if the Work proves to be in conformance
with the Contract Documents, or if the defective condition was caused by the
Owner or Others. If the uncovered Work
proves to be defective, the Contractor shall pay the costs of uncovering and
replacement.
§3.10.2 If contrary to
specific requirements in the Contract Documents or contrary to a specific
request from the Owner, a portion of the Work is covered, the Owner, by written
request, may require the Contractor to uncover the Work for the Owner's
observation. In this circumstance the Work shall be replaced at the
Contractor's expense and with no adjustment to the Contract Time.
Under the 2007 AIA A201 General Conditions, the Contractor
warrants that the work will be free from defects and will conform to Contract
Documents.[9] In the 2007 version, however, the warranty
text is rephrased to narrow the warranty exclusion for defects not “inherent in
the quality required or permitted.” It
now reads that the work will be free from defects, “except for those inherent
in the quality of the Work the Contract Documents require or permit.”[10] The new language ties the exception directly
to the Contract Documents rather than a vague industry standard.
AIA § 3.5 WARRANTY
The Contractor warrants to the Owner and Architect that
materials and equipment furnished under the Contract will be of good quality
and new unless the Contract Documents require or permit otherwise. The
Contractor further warrants that the Work will conform to the requirements of
the Contract Documents and will be free from defects, except for those inherent
in the quality of the Work the Contract Documents require or permit. Work,
materials, or equipment not conforming to these requirements may be considered
defective. The Contractor’s warranty excludes remedy for damage or defect
caused by abuse, alterations to the Work not executed by the Contractor,
improper or insufficient maintenance, improper operation, or normal wear and
tear and normal usage. If required by the Architect, the Contractor shall furnish
satisfactory evidence as to the kind and quality of materials and equipment.
Similar to the ConsensusDOCS, the AIA forms have extensive
correction of work provisions set forth in Article 12.[11] These provisions likewise set forth a notice
and correction period for any defects found prior to, or within one year after,
the date of Substantial Completion (the “call-back” warranty).[12] The AIA form also expressly states that the
“call-back” warranty addresses only the requirement that the contractor correct
the work and does not limit any other contractual rights or obligations, i.e. the contractual guaranty of the
quality of the work, which is limited by the applicable statute of limitations,
e.g., for a written contract, and may
be limited ultimately by the applicable state statute of repose (which
typically runs from substantial completion).
AIA - §12.2 CORRECTION OF WORK
§12.2.1 BEFORE OR AFTER SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION
The Contractor shall promptly correct Work
rejected by the Architect or failing to conform to the requirements of the
Contract Documents, whether discovered before or after Substantial Completion
and whether or not fabricated, installed or completed. Costs of correcting such
rejected Work, including additional testing and inspections, the cost of
uncovering and replacement, and compensation for the Architect’s services and
expenses made necessary thereby, shall be at the Contractor’s expense.
§12.2.2 AFTER SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION
§12.2.2.1
In addition to the Contractor’s obligations under Section 3.5, if, within one
year after the date of Substantial Completion of the Work or designated portion
thereof or after the date for commencement of warranties established under
Section 9.9.1, or by terms of an applicable special warranty required by the Contract
Documents, any of the Work is found to be not in accordance with the
requirements of the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall correct it
promptly after receipt of written notice from the Owner to do so unless the
Owner has previously given the Contractor a written acceptance of such
condition. The Owner shall give such notice promptly after discovery of the
condition. During the one-year period for correction of Work, if the Owner
fails to notify the Contractor and give the Contractor an opportunity to make
the correction, the Owner waives the rights to require correction by the
Contractor and to make a claim for breach of warranty. If the Contractor fails
to correct nonconforming Work within a reasonable time during that period after
receipt of notice from the Owner or Architect, the Owner may correct it in
accordance with Section 2.4.
§12.2.2.2
The one-year period for correction of Work shall be extended with respect to
portions of Work first performed after Substantial Completion by the period of
time between Substantial Completion and the actual completion of that portion
of the Work.
§12.2.2.3
The one-year period for correction of Work shall not be extended by corrective
Work performed by the Contractor pursuant to this Section 12.2.
§12.2.3
The Contractor shall remove from the site portions of the Work that are not in
accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents and are neither
corrected by the Contractor nor accepted by the Owner.
§12.2.4
The Contractor shall bear the cost of correcting destroyed or damaged
construction, whether completed or partially completed, of the Owner or
separate contractors caused by the Contractor’s correction or removal of Work
that is not in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents.
§12.2.5
Nothing contained in this Section 12.2 shall be construed to establish a period
of limitation with respect to other obligations the Contractor has under the
Contract Documents. Establishment of the one-year period for correction of Work
as described in Section 12.2.2 relates only to the specific obligation of the
Contractor to correct the Work, and has no relationship to the time within
which the obligation to comply with the Contract Documents may be sought to be
enforced, nor to the time within which proceedings may be commenced to
establish the Contractor’s liability with respect to the Contractor’s
obligations other than specifically to correct the Work.
AIA - §12.3 ACCEPTANCE OF NONCONFORMING WORK
If the Owner prefers to accept Work that
is not in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents, the Owner
may do so instead of requiring its removal and correction, in which case the
Contract Sum will be reduced as appropriate and equitable. Such adjustment
shall be effected whether or not final payment has been made.
The EJCDC C-700 also provides similar
terms and conditions regarding warranting that the “Work will be in accordance
with the Contract Documents and will not be defective” and that the materials
and equipment “shall be as specified for or, if not specified, shall be of good
quality and new, except as otherwise provided in the Contract Documents.”[13]
EJCDC – Article 1 – Definitions and
Terminology
§1.02B1
Intent of Certain Terms or Adjectives:
The Contract Documents include the terms “as allowed,” “as approved,”
“as ordered,” “as directed” or terms of like effect or import to authorize an
exercise of professional judgment by Engineer. In addition, the adjectives
“reasonable,” “suitable,” “acceptable,” “proper,” “satisfactory,” or adjectives
of like effect or import are used to describe an action or determination of
Engineer as to the Work. It is intended that such exercise of professional
judgment, action, or determination will be solely to evaluate, in general, the
Work for compliance with the information in the Contract Documents and with the
design concept of the Project as a
functioning whole as shown or indicated in the Contract Documents (unless there
is a specific statement indicating otherwise). The use of any such term or
adjective is not intended to and shall not be effective to assign to Engineer
any duty or authority to supervise or direct the performance of the Work, or
any duty or authority to undertake responsibility contrary to the provisions of
Paragraph 9.09 or any other provision of the Contract Documents.
§1.02D The word “defective,” when modifying the word “Work,” refers to
Work that is unsatisfactory, faulty, or deficient in that it:
a. does not conform to the Contract
Documents; or
b. does not meet the requirements of
any applicable inspection, reference standard, test, or approval referred to in
the Contract Documents; or
c. has been damaged prior to
Engineer’s recommendation of final payment (unless responsibility for the
protection thereof has been assumed by Owner at Substantial Completion in
accordance with Paragraph 14.04 or 14.05).
The C-700
goes on to define “perform” and “provide” as:
“ when used in connection with
services, materials, or equipment, shall mean to furnish and install said
services, materials, or equipment complete and ready for intended use” in
§1.02E3
EJCDC - §6.03B - Services, Materials, and Equipment - All
materials and equipment incorporated into the Work shall be as specified or, if
not specified, shall be of good quality and new, except as otherwise provided
in the Contract Documents. All special warranties and guarantees required by
the Specifications shall expressly run to the benefit of Owner. If required by
Engineer, Contractor shall furnish satisfactory evidence (including reports of
required tests) as to the source, kind, and quality of materials and equipment.
EJCDC §6.19
A. Contractor warrants and guarantees to Owner that all Work will be
in accordance with the Contract Documents and will not be defective. Engineer
and its officers, directors, members, partners, employees, agents, consultants,
and subcontractors shall be entitled to rely on representation of Contractor’s
warranty and guarantee.
B. Contractor’s warranty and
guarantee hereunder excludes defects or damage caused by:
1. abuse, modification, or improper
maintenance or operation by persons other than Contractor, Subcontractors,
Suppliers, or any other individual or entity for whom Contractor is
responsible; or
2. normal wear and tear under normal
usage.
C. Contractor’s obligation to
perform and complete the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents shall
be absolute. None of the following will constitute an acceptance of Work that
is not in accordance with the Contract Documents or a release of Contractor’s
obligation to perform the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents:
1. observations by Engineer;
2. recommendation by Engineer or
payment by Owner of any progress or final payment;
3. the issuance of a certificate of
Substantial Completion by Engineer or any payment related thereto by Owner;
4. use or occupancy of the Work or
any part thereof by Owner;
5. any review and approval of a Shop
Drawing or Sample submittal or the issuance of a notice of acceptability by
Engineer;
6. any inspection, test, or approval
by others; or
7. any correction of defective Work
by Owner.
Under the payment provisions of each of the three forms, by
submitting its payment applications, the contractor also warrants that title to
all of the work, equipment and/or materials furnished to the project and covered
by that particular pay application will pass to the owner upon payment.[14]
Additional considerations should be addressed in
negotiating the warranty and correction of work provisions. First, should the one-year call-back warranty
run from the date of final completion or substantial completion? From the contractor’s perspective, it makes
sense to run the warranty from substantial completion as that limits (and
compared to the alternative, shortens) the call-back period. It also arguably is a fair result in that at
substantial completion the work should be sufficiently complete. Owners, on the other hand, will push for
final completion as that extends out the call-back warranty obligations, which
inures to the benefit of the owner. For
contractors, final completion under the contract is often delayed well past
substantial completion due to payment tails and certifications that are
designed to protect the owner from liens and claims. They view construction sufficiently complete
for call-back purposes at substantial completion, and pushing it to start at
final completion simply calls for a de
facto one-year plus call-back warranty because corrective work which
otherwise would be treated as call-back work under a substantial completion
benchmark instead will be required up to the point of final completion as
“punchlist” work. The owner may need to
increase the value of this “extended” warranty in the negotiated price.
Second,
both the owner and the contractor must be mindful of the potential gap in
coverage between a manufacturer’s warranty and the start of the contractor’s
warranty under the Contract Documents.
Most manufacturer warranties will run upon date of delivery (varying
between date shipped and date delivered to the site), whereas the contractor’s
warranty will not start until substantial or final completion. Thus, for early installation items, the
manufacturer’s warranty will be running well in advance of the contractor’s
warranty, and, in turn, will run out before the expiration of the contractor’s
warranty. At that point, the contractor
that furnished or installed the defective item takes on the risk of the defect
without recourse to the manufacturer for that timing difference (between the
start of the manufacturer’s warranty and the start of the contractor’s
warranty). Likewise, a project under
delay with corresponding pushed out dates of completion will also widen this
gap between the contractor’s warranty term and downstream supplier or
manufacturer recourse when equipment may be shipped on time but installed late
and started up even later still due to delays.
The
contractor can attempt to draft around this gap liability by expressly limiting
its warranty and carving out any manufacturer’s warranty. In short, to the extent a manufacturing defect
or warranty issue arises, the owner agrees to pursue only its rights under the
manufacturer’s warranty not the contractor’s warranty, thereby taking the
contractor out of the loop on that liability item. The contractor may also try to extend out the
manufacturer’s warranty beyond its original terms. However, even if the manufacturer agreed
(presumably most major manufacturers would not be so inclined) such an
extension would come at a price that would either have to be absorbed by the
contractor or passed upstream to the owner.
An owner looking to maximize its warranty protections will run the
contractor’s warranty from final completion and make that warranty applicable
to all manufacturer warranties as well.
Finally,
the drafter must be cognizant of any implied warranties that survive by statute
or common law. The law has always “implied” or assumed that certain terms and
responsibilities exist between the contracting parties, even if they are not
expressly stated. Many of these implied
warranties apply (or may apply) to contractors, including: (a) the implied
warranty of skill and fitness (workmanlike construction); (b) habitability (a
new residential improvement will be habitable and fit for habitation); (c) duty
not to hinder performance (neither party will hinder the other in his discharge
of the obligations imposed upon him nor increase his cost of performance); (d)
merchantability (goods are merchantable and fit for the ordinary purposes for
which such goods are used); (e) and fitness for a particular purpose (the goods are fit for a
particular purpose for which goods are required, the seller has reason to know
that purpose, and buyer relies on seller's skill or judgment to select or
furnish suitable goods). Nevertheless, these warranties
can generally be disclaimed by express contractual terms and compliance with
any applicable statutory procedure.
The construction contract between the
owner and contractor sets forth in detail the contractor's performance
obligations, but the parties need flexibility to adapt the contract to actual
construction conditions encountered.
Although traditional contract law permits the parties to a contract to
modify or change their arrangement by mutual agreement, in construction the
owner needs to be able to unilaterally change the contract to accomplish his
underlying purpose on the project.
The contractual mechanism in
construction contracts for handling contract modifications or changes and
claims for extra work in connection with them, is the “changes” clause. The “changes” clause entitles the owner to
unilaterally direct changes in the work without the contractor's consent and
without breaching the contract provided the change is within the general scope
of the contract. For a proposed change
to be “within the general scope” of the contract, the change in the work must
be regarded as fairly and reasonably within the contemplation of the parties when they
entered into the contract.
In exchange for this right to direct changes, the
contractor is entitled to receive additional compensation for the changed or
extra work. Both the contract price and
the contract time to perform the work are subject to adjustment. The changes clause establishes the procedure
for the owner to make a change and for the contractor to seek compensation for
the changed work to be performed. Thus,
the negotiation and drafting of the changes clause in many ways sets the stage for the contractor’s dilemma of how to
address field performance claims for formal and/or constructive changes.
A typical “changes” clause is that
found in Article 7 of the AIA A201 General Conditions of the Contract for
Construction. The AIA documents identify three different types of
changes: (1) Formal Change Orders (signed by both the owner and the contractor);[15]
(2) Construction Change Directives (signed only by the owner and need not be
signed by the contractor);[16]
and (3) Field Orders (signed by the architect only - for minor changes in the
work).[17] The
formal change order is used when the parties are in agreement as to the scope
and pricing of the change. The change
directive is utilized when there is not total agreement on the terms of the
change. Minor change orders, by
definition, involve no adjustment to the contract price or time for performance.
Similarly, ConsensusDOCS refers to
types of changes, primarily the Change Order and an Interim Directed
Change:
ConsensusDOCS - §8.1 CHANGE ORDER
§8.1.1 The Contractor
may request or the Owner may order changes in the Work or the timing or
sequencing of the Work that impacts the Contract Price or the Contract Time.
All such changes in the Work that affect Contract Time or Contract Price shall
be formalized in a Change Order. Any such requests for a change in the Contract
Price or the Contract Time shall be processed in accordance with this Article
8.
§8.1.2 The Owner and
the Contractor shall negotiate in good faith an appropriate adjustment to the
Contract Price or the Contract Time and shall conclude these negotiations as
expeditiously as possible. Acceptance of the Change Order and any adjustment in
the Contract Price or Contract Time shall not be unreasonably withheld.
ConsensusDOCS - §8.2 INTERIM DIRECTED CHANGE
§8.2.1 The Owner may
issue a written Interim Directed Change directing a change in the Work prior to
reaching agreement with the Contractor on the adjustment, if any, in the
Contract Price or the Contract Time.
§8.2.2 The Owner and
the Contractor shall negotiate expeditiously and in good faith for appropriate
adjustments, as applicable, to the Contract Price or the Contract Time arising
out of an Interim Directed Change. As the Changed Work is performed, the
Contractor shall submit its costs for such work with its application for
payment beginning with the next application for payment within thirty (30) Days
of the issuance of the Interim Directed Change. If there is a dispute as to the
cost to the Owner, the Owner shall pay the Contractor fifty percent (50%) of
its estimated cost to perform the work. In such event, the Parties reserve their
rights as to the disputed amount, subject to the requirements of Article 12.
§8.2.3 When the Owner
and the Contractor agree upon the adjustment in the Contract Price or the
Contract Time, for a change in the Work directed by an Interim Directed Change,
such agreement shall be the subject of a Change Order. The Change Order shall
include all outstanding Interim Directed Changes on which the Owner and
Contractor have reached agreement on Contract Price or Contract Time issued
since the last Change Order.[18]
The EJCDC C-700 also discusses
changes and states that the Contract Documents can be amended by either a
Change Order or a Work Change Directive, and that they may be supplemented to
incorporate minor various in the Work generally by 1) a Field Order, 2) Engineer’s
approval of a Shop Drawing or Sample, or 3) Engineer’s written interpretation
or clarification.[19] The EJCDC change order procedure is set out
in Article 10, while the concomitant change in contract price or time addressed
in Article 12.
EJCDC – Article 10.01 Authorized Changes in the Work
A. Without
invalidating the Contract and without notice to any surety, Owner may, at any
time or from time to time, order additions, deletions, or revisions in the Work
by a Change Order, or a Work Change Directive. Upon receipt of any such
document, Contractor shall promptly proceed with the Work involved which will
be performed under the applicable conditions of the Contract Documents (except
as otherwise specifically provided).
B. If Owner and
Contractor are unable to agree on entitlement to, or on the amount or extent,
if any, of an adjustment in the Contract Price or Contract Times, or both, that
should be allowed as a result of a Work Change Directive, a Claim may be made
therefor as provided in Paragraph 10.05.
10.02 Unauthorized
Changes in the Work
A. Contractor
shall not be entitled to an increase in the Contract Price or an extension of
the Contract Times with respect to any work performed that is not required by
the Contract Documents as amended, modified, or supplemented as provided in
Paragraph 3.04, except in the case of an emergency as provided in Paragraph
6.16 or in the case of uncovering Work as provided in Paragraph 13.04.B.
10.03 Execution of
Change Orders
A. Owner and
Contractor shall execute appropriate Change Orders recommended by Engineer
covering: 1. changes in the Work which are: (i) ordered by Owner pursuant to
Paragraph 10.01.A, (ii) required because of acceptance of defective Work under
Paragraph 13.08.A or Owner’s correction of defective Work under Paragraph
13.09, or (iii) agreed to by the parties;
2. changes in the
Contract Price or Contract Times which are agreed to by the parties, including
any undisputed sum or amount of time for Work actually performed in accordance
with a Work Change Directive; and 3. changes in the Contract Price or Contract
Times which embody the substance of any written decision rendered by Engineer
pursuant to Paragraph 10.05; provided that, in lieu of executing any such
Change Order, an appeal may be taken from any such decision in accordance with
the provisions of the Contract Documents and applicable Laws and Regulations,
but during any such appeal, Contractor shall carry on the Work and adhere to
the Progress
Schedule as provided in Paragraph 6.18.A.
Each of the three forms contains detailed procedures for
pricing the changed work, addressing
disputed changes and work directives, and entitlement to a change in contract
time and/or price.[20] Generally, even if the contractor disputes an
ordered change, it must proceed with the work seek recourse through the claims
provisions of the respective contract.[21] Under the ConsensusDOCS, however, the Owner
must pay the Contractor 50% of the estimated cost to complete the disputed
work, whereas no such obligation exists under the AIA or EJCDC forms. This is an added protection to the contractor
and benefits the owner as well by allowing the project to move forward while
the parties figure out the details.[22]
The typical “changes” clause requires
written authorization for the change.
Likewise, there is a written authorization requirement in most
subcontract forms. These clauses require
that there be a written change order or directive before the commencement of
the changed or revised work. Moreover,
the existence of the change order or written authorization is typically a
condition to the contractor's right to receive compensation for the extra work
performed. It is imperative that the
contractor be familiar with, and follows closely, this contract mechanism or
procedure in order to receive an adjustment to the contract price and/or time.
Although not all courts have been so
strict in interpreting the written change order requirement, opting instead to
rely on the doctrines of waiver and subsequent verbal modification to overcome
the impact of the writing requirement on the contractor’s claim, the general
rule remains that the contractor who performs the work without a written
directive to do so when the contract provides for a written change order may
not have a legally enforceable claim.[23] Consequently, the writing and notice
requirements articulated in a changes clause should be carefully reviewed by
both the owner and contractor in negotiating the contract. Otherwise, the contractor will be left
arguing that the requirement was waived – an argument that may or may not have
viability.
One drafting consideration from the
owner’s perspective is to include in the contract a requirement that the
contractor must continue performance of the
work, including any change work, pending the necessary modification of the
contract sum or time. The reason for
this is a recognition that changes are inevitable and that owners need to be
protected against possible work stoppages and delays while negotiations over
the contract sum and/or time are in progress.
Standard contract language typically provides the owner or its architect
and engineer the right to order the contractor to proceed with the disputed
change work, unless the work at issue is so far beyond the scope of the contract
as to constitute a cardinal change.
From the contractor’s perspective, it
is important to clearly articulate who has authority on behalf of the owner to
direct changes in the work. The reason
for this is simple. If the contractor
receives directions or instructions to perform changed work or extra work from
an individual that does not have the requisite authority to do so, the owner
may not be bound under traditional agency law.
Consequently, the contractor may find that he has performed the work as
a volunteer and may not receive any money for it. To manage this risk, the contractor should
include in the contract a clear designation of authority of both the owner’s
representative and project architect, as well as include a mechanism or timing
provision that permits the contractor to verify authorization of a change or
extra work order without violating the contractual duty to proceed with
disputed work.
§ 4 Differing
Site Conditions
Many times a contractor will
experience differing site conditions from those anticipated or set forth in the
plans and specifications. When the contractor encounters these conditions, he
must have a means of receiving additional compensation in order to recover the
resulting increased costs of performance.
The contractual provision that allows recovery or adjustment in the
contract price for differing site conditions is the “differing site conditions”
clause.
From the contractor’s point of view,
the need for this clause in the contract documents is essential because without
it, the contractor may well be treated as having assumed the risk of the
unforeseeable conditions and will have to bear the additional costs occasioned
by that condition. In short, the
“differing site conditions” clause eliminates the risk of not being compensated
for unanticipated conditions encountered.
The clause provides the contractor a means of getting a fair adjustment
in his contract price if and when differing site conditions are encountered.
From the owner’s point of view, the
presence of the clause eliminates the risk to the owner of receiving bids that
are higher than may otherwise be necessary in order to cover unanticipated
sub-surface or other differing site conditions that may or may not actually
occur on the project. Because of the risk
of encountering those conditions, a contractor has to build in some of his
anticipated costs in his bid price. If
the conditions are not encountered, then the owner has simply bought a more
expensive project. With the “differing
site conditions” clause, the owner must only pay for the increased cost of
performance caused by differing site conditions if and when the contractor
actually encounters these conditions and if the contractor complies with
the notice requirements in the clause.
The respective points of view of both
the contractor and owner obviously drive the drafting of the “differing site
conditions” clause.[24] A good “differing site conditions” clause,
however, should have two primary components:
(a) a definition or delineation of qualifying unanticipated sub-surface
or site conditions; (b) a clear expression of the contractor’s notice and time
requirements for submitting a claim under the clause.
The AIA “differing site conditions”
clause, set forth at ¶3.7.4 of the 2007 AIA General Conditions of the Contract
for Construction (AIA Document A201, 2007 ed.), defines two types of conditions
that trigger the protections of the clause.
The first type, referred to as “Type One” conditions, are concealed
conditions below the surface or other concealed physical conditions that are
materially at variance with the conditions indicated in the contract
documents. These are unforeseeable
conditions. The second type, referred to
as “Type Two” conditions, consist of unknown physical conditions of an unusual
nature differing materially from those ordinarily found to exist and generally
recognized as inherent in the particular type of construction. These are atypical conditions.
The AIA notice and time requirements
have become more restrictive in the 2007 version of the AIA A201 General
Conditions. Under the 1997 edition, the
differing site conditions clause (located at ¶4.3.4), required prompt notice by
the party observing the differing site condition (normally, this will be the
contractor) to the other party before the conditions are disturbed and in no
event later than 21 days after the first observance of the conditions. The architect is then required to
investigate the site and determine whether a differing site condition is
present. In the 2007 revisions (¶3.7.4),
the notice obligations are placed squarely on the shoulders of the contractor,
not the party that first observes the condition. The 2007 changes retain the 21-day notice
requirement to the architect. However,
there is no deadline by which the architect must make its determination or
respond. As such, the contractor may be
required to make a claim under the Article 15 claim deadlines before a
determination has been made by the architect.
The notice is not required to be in writing, but (at a minimum) it
should be confirmed in writing.
Both the 2007 and the 1997 AIA A201
differing site conditions clauses tie into the “disputes” clause or claims
clause to the extent that the contractor makes a claim for additional
compensation or extension of time. If a
dispute develops over whether a differing site condition has been encountered,
or how it is to be paid for, a claim must be submitted by the Contractor to
preserve his rights. Under the new 2007
AIA General Conditions, the disputes or claims clause is set forth in ¶15.1.4
for additional costs and ¶15.1.5 for additional time of Article 15 on Claims
and Disputes, (AIA Document A201, 2007 ed.).
Notice must be given of a contractor's claim within 21 days (¶15.1.2 of
AIA A201 General Conditions).
By comparison, the ConsensusDOCS 200 differing site
conditions clause, being §3.16.2, breaks down the types of conditions along the
Type I and Type II definitions long utilized in the AIA documents. The ConsensusDOCS form provides that Type I (i.e., conditions different from the
Contract Documents) and Type II (i.e.,
conditions different from those reasonably expected on a similar site)
conditions can result in excusable and compensable claims in terms of time and
money. (ConsensusDOCS 200 §3.16) The ConsensusDOCS differing site conditions clause similarly ties into the claims clause
to the extent that the contractor makes a claim for additional compensation or
extension of time.
ConsensusDOCS §3.16 WORKSITE CONDITIONS
§3.16.1 WORKSITE VISIT The Contractor acknowledges that it has
visited, or has had the opportunity to visit, the Worksite to visually inspect
the general and local conditions which could affect the Work.
§3.16.2 CONCEALED OR UNKNOWN SITE CONDITIONS If the conditions
at the Worksite are (a) subsurface or other physical conditions which are
materially different from those indicated in the Contract Documents, or (b)
unusual or unknown physical conditions which are materially different from
conditions ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inherent in Work
provided for in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall stop Work and give
immediate written notice of the condition to the Owner and the
Architect/Engineer. The Contractor shall
not be required to perform any work relating to the unknown condition without
the written mutual agreement of the Parties.
Any change in the Contract Price or the Contract Time as a result of the
unknown condition shall be determined as provided in Article 8. The Contractor shall provide the Owner with
written notice of any claim as a result of unknown conditions within the time
period set forth in Paragraph 8.4.
ConsensusDOCS - §8.4 CLAIMS FOR ADDITIONAL COST OR TIME Except as provided
in Subparagraph 6.3.2 and Paragraph 6.4 for any claim for an increase in the
Contract Price or the Contract Time, the Contractor shall give the Owner
written notice of the claim within fourteen (14) Days after the occurrence
giving rise to the claim or within fourteen (14) Days after the Contractor
first recognizes the condition giving rise to the claim, whichever is
later. Except in an emergency, notice
shall be given before proceeding with the Work.
Thereafter, the Contractor shall submit written documentation of its
claim, including appropriate supporting documentation, within twenty-one (21)
Days after giving notice, unless the Parties mutually agree upon a longer
period of time. The Owner shall respond
in writing denying or approving the Contractor's claim no later than fourteen
(14) Days after receipt of the Contractor's claim. Any change in the Contract Price or the
Contract Time resulting from such claim shall be authorized by Change Order.
Under the ConsensusDOCS, the Contractor encountering a
differing site condition must: (1) Provide the Owner with notice of the
differing site condition immediately upon uncovering the condition; (2) Stop
work; and (3) Wait until the parties reach a resolution as to how to handle the
condition.[25]
The EJCDC C-700, §4.03,
provides that if the Contractor finds any subsurface or physical
condition that (1) may establish “technical data” on which the Contractor may
rely, (2) will require a change in the Contract Documents, (3) differs
materially from the Contract Documents, or (4) is of an unusual nature and
different materially from conditions ordinarily encountered, the Contractor
“shall, promptly after becoming aware thereof and before further disturbing the
subsurface or physical conditions or performing any Work in connection
therewith… notify the Owner and Engineer in writing.”[26] It further delineates how and under what
circumstances the contractor may be entitled to an adjustment in contract price
and/or time.
The major forms, AIA, ConsensusDOCS and EJCDC, provide
guidance with respect to the type of conditions that trigger the protections of
the “differing site conditions” clause,
as well as the timing and notice requirements the contractor must comply with
in order to seek recourse under that clause.
However, additional issues sometimes arise in conjunction with a
differing site conditions claim that stem from other contractual duties or
provisions, such as the contractor’s duty to investigate the site, owner
disclaimers and general notice requirements, all of which should be addressed
prospectively through the drafting of the contract when considering and
allocating the risks targeted by a differing site conditions clause.
First, most construction contracts
provide that the contractor “acknowledges” his legal and contractual
obligations to investigate the job site in order to become totally familiar
with all job site physical conditions.[27] This obligation is set forth in what is
referred to as the “site investigation” clause.
In order to recover on a “differing site conditions” claim, the
contractor must show that the condition was latent or not one which was
reasonably anticipated by the plans and specifications. He cannot rely on site conditions indicated
in the contract if a reasonable pre-bid site inspection would have revealed
those conditions, and he is put on constructive notice of what a reasonable
site inspection would reveal.
Conversely, a site condition that could not be discovered through a
pre-bid site visit by a reasonably prudent contractor can give rise to a
differing site conditions claim.[28] However,
such clauses require only a reasonable investigation, and they typically
will not obligate the contractor to discover hidden subsurface conditions.
While site investigation clauses do
not totally shield the owner from claims due to unanticipated site conditions,
they do provide a potential hurdle or gatekeeper function for the Owner for
obvious site conditions. It also serves
as a strong forewarning to the contractor of his investigation responsibilities.
Second, Owners often attempt to limit
their exposure to liability by virtue of various disclaimers or exculpatory
clauses, which are intended to disclaim any liability or responsibility for the
accuracy of the plans and specifications, boring surveys or other subsurface
data, or for subsurface conditions generally.
Many courts have been reluctant to allow an owner to utilize exculpatory
or disclaimer clauses to escape liability he would otherwise have under the
differing site conditions clause in the contract.[29]
Third, as discussed above, notice
requirements are an essential part of nearly every “differing site conditions”
clause, and certainly the ConsensusDOCS, AIA and EJCDC standard clauses
discussed herein. These clauses
typically require that the contractor give immediate notice of a differing site
condition when it is encountered and
before it is disturbed. The purpose
of the notice requirements is to allow the owner to determine whether a
differing site condition in fact exists and to decide how the contract work
should proceed from that point forward.
If the contractor proceeds to perform the work and disturbs or destroys
the conditions encountered without complying with the notice requirements to
the owner, then the contractor may have waived his right to obtain an equitable
adjustment in his contract price.[30] Thus, both the contractor and owner must look
closely at the notice periods set forth in the contract, as modification to the
notice requirements, (both within the “differing site conditions” clause itself
and the general claims provision) may significantly impact the ability to
recover on a differing site conditions” claim.
As a
corollary to the differing site condition and issues related thereto, are the
hazardous materials provisions. While
separate and distinct from a differing site condition, these clauses are
conceptually similar in that they constitute contractual risk allocations for
unanticipated conditions encountered on the site, and will generally shift
liability to the owner provided the contractor is not at fault and complies
with the notice and protection provisions set forth in the contract. All three standard contract forms
(ConsensusDOCS, AIA and EJCDC) contain extensive Hazardous Materials clauses
that set forth the procedures to be followed when handling and/or encountering
hazardous materials or environmental conditions on the project. They typically permit the contractor
encountering a hazardous material or condition to immediately stop work, report
the condition to the owner, architect/engineer or relevant agency, and await
further directive as to how to proceed.
They also generally provide grounds for a time extension, and/or
adjustment in the contract price.
ConsensusDOCS -
§3.13 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
§3.13.1 A Hazardous
Material is any substance or material identified now or in the future as
hazardous under any federal, state or local law or regulation, or any other
substance or material that may be considered hazardous or otherwise subject to
statutory or regulatory requirement governing handling, disposal or cleanup.
The Contractor shall not be obligated to commence or continue work until any
Hazardous Material discovered at the Worksite has been removed, rendered or
determined to be harmless by the Owner as certified by an independent testing
laboratory and approved by the appropriate government agency.
§3.13.2 If after the
commencement of the Work Hazardous Material is discovered at the Worksite, the
Contractor shall be entitled to immediately stop Work in the affected area. The
Contractor shall report the condition to the Owner, the Architect/Engineer,
and, if required, the government agency with jurisdiction.
§3.13.3 The Contractor
shall not be required to perform any Work relating to or in the area of
Hazardous Material without written mutual agreement.
§3.13.4 The Owner
shall be responsible for retaining an independent testing laboratory to
determine the nature of the material encountered and whether the material
requires corrective measures or remedial action. Such measures shall be the
sole responsibility of the Owner, and shall be performed in a manner minimizing
any adverse effects upon the Work. The Contractor shall resume Work in the area
affected by any Hazardous Material only upon written agreement between the
Parties after the Hazardous Material has been removed or rendered harmless and
only after approval, if necessary, of the governmental agency with
jurisdiction.
§3.13.5 If the
Contractor incurs additional costs or is delayed due to the presence or
remediation of Hazardous Material, the Contractor shall be entitled to an
equitable adjustment in the Contract Price or the Contract Time.
EJCDC -
§4.06 Hazardous Environmental Condition
at Site
A.
Reports and Drawings:
The Supplementary Conditions identify those reports and drawings known
to Owner relating to Hazardous Environmental Conditions that have been
identified at the Site.
B.
Limited Reliance by Contractor on
Technical Data Authorized: Contractor may rely upon
the accuracy of the “technical data” contained in such reports and drawings,
but such reports and drawings are not Contract Documents. Such “technical data”
is identified in the Supplementary Conditions. Except for such reliance on such
“technical data,” Contractor may not rely upon or make any claim against Owner
or Engineer, or any of their officers, directors, members, partners, employees,
agents, consultants, or subcontractors with respect to:
1.
the completeness of such reports and drawings for Contractor’s
purposes, including, but not limited to, any aspects of the means, methods, techniques,
sequences and procedures of construction to be employed by Contractor and
safety precautions and programs incident thereto; or
2.
other data, interpretations, opinions and information contained in
such reports or shown or indicated in such drawings; or
3.
any Contractor interpretation of or conclusion drawn from any
“technical data” or any such other data, interpretations, opinions or
information.
C.
Contractor shall not be responsible for any Hazardous
Environmental Condition uncovered or revealed at the Site which was not shown
or indicated in Drawings or Specifications or identified in the Contract
Documents to be within the scope of the Work. Contractor shall be responsible
for a Hazardous Environmental Condition created with any materials brought to the
Site by Contractor, Subcontractors, Suppliers, or anyone else for whom
Contractor is responsible.
D.
If Contractor encounters a Hazardous Environmental Condition or if
Contractor or anyone for whom Contractor is responsible creates a Hazardous
Environmental Condition, Contractor shall immediately: (i) secure or otherwise isolate such
condition; (ii) stop all Work in connection with such condition and in any area
affected thereby (except in an emergency as required by Paragraph 6.16.A); and
(iii) notify Owner and Engineer (and promptly thereafter confirm such notice in
writing). Owner shall promptly consult with Engineer concerning the necessity
for Owner to retain a qualified expert to evaluate such condition or take
corrective action, if any. Promptly after
consulting with Engineer, Owner shall take such actions as are necessary to
permit Owner to timely obtain required permits and provide Contractor the
written notice required by Paragraph 4.06.E.
E. Contractor shall not be required to resume Work in connection with
such condition or in any affected area until after Owner has obtained any
required permits related thereto and delivered written notice to
Contractor: (i) specifying that such
condition and any affected area is or has been rendered safe for the resumption
of Work; or (ii) specifying any special conditions under which such Work may be
resumed safely. If Owner and Contractor cannot agree as to entitlement to or on
the amount or extent, if any, of any adjustment in Contract Price or Contract
Times, or both, as a result of such Work stoppage or such special conditions
under which Work is agreed to be resumed by Contractor, either party may make a
Claim therefor as provided in Paragraph 10.05.
F. If after receipt of such written notice Contractor does not agree
to resume such Work based on a reasonable belief it is unsafe, or does not
agree to resume such Work under such special conditions, then Owner may order
the portion of the Work that is in the area affected by such condition to be
deleted from the Work. If Owner and Contractor cannot agree as to entitlement
to or on the amount or extent, if any, of an adjustment in Contract Price or
Contract Times as a result of deleting such portion of the Work, then either
party may make a Claim therefor as provided in Paragraph 10.05. Owner may have
such deleted portion of the Work performed by Owner’s own forces or others in
accordance with Article 7.
AIA - §10.3 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
§10.3.1 The Contractor is responsible for
compliance with any requirements included in the Contract Documents regarding
hazardous materials. If the Contractor encounters a hazardous material or
substance not addressed in the Contract Documents and if reasonable precautions
will be inadequate to prevent foreseeable bodily injury or death to persons
resulting from a material or substance, including but not limited to asbestos
or polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB), encountered on the site by the Contractor,
the Contractor shall, upon recognizing the condition, immediately stop Work in
the affected area and report the condition to the Owner and Architect in
writing.
§10.3.2 Upon receipt of the Contractor’s written
notice, the Owner shall obtain the services of a licensed laboratory to verify
the presence or absence of the material or substance reported by the Contractor
and, in the event such material or substance is found to be present, to cause
it to be rendered harmless. Unless otherwise required by the Contract
Documents, the Owner shall furnish in writing to the Contractor and Architect
the names and qualifications of persons or entities who are to perform tests
verifying the presence or absence of such material or substance or who are to
perform the task of removal or safe containment of such material or substance.
The Contractor and the Architect will promptly reply to the Owner in writing
stating whether or not either has reasonable objection to the persons or
entities proposed by the Owner. If either the Contractor or Architect has an
objection to a person or entity proposed by the Owner, the Owner shall propose
another to whom the Contractor and the Architect have no reasonable objection.
When the material or substance has been rendered harmless, Work in the affected
area shall resume upon written agreement of the Owner and Contractor. By Change
Order, the Contract Time shall be extended appropriately and the Contract Sum
shall be increased in the amount of the Contractor’s reasonable additional
costs of shut-down, delay and start-up.
§10.3.4 The Owner shall not be responsible under
this Section 10.3 for materials or substances the Contractor brings to the site
unless such materials or substances are required by the Contract Documents. The
Owner shall be responsible for materials or substances required by the Contract
Documents, except to the extent of the Contractor’s fault or negligence in the
use and handling of such materials or substances.
§ 5 Limitations of Liability
Waiver of
Consequential Damages
Generally, the standard forms follow general and
well-established trends in their approach to contractual limitations of
liability. The AIA retains in its 2007
family of forms the mutual waiver of consequential damages. The ConsensusDOCS contain a limited waiver of
consequential damages. The EJCDC form,
in contrast, typically slants in favor of the engineer in its limitations on
liability.
Although these mutual waivers (whether full or limited)
have become commonplace in both standard and custom contract forms, the
standard forms vary greatly in how they define or address the scope of damages
waived as consequential damages. For
example, the AIA clause does not delineate what types of damages fall within the waiver. In contrast, the ConsensusDOCS forms
typically include the Owner’s loss of use, rental expenses, loss of income,
profit or financing related to the Project, and the contractor’s and designer’s
damages for loss of business, financing, profits (unrelated to the Project),
overhead and expenses, loss of reputation, and loss of profits unrelated to the
Project. The EJCDC forms generally offer
a variety of liability limitation options – again, all of which tend to inure
to the benefit of the designer.
ConsensusDOCS - §6.6 LIMITED MUTUAL WAIVER OF CONSEQUENTIAL
DAMAGES
Except for damages mutually agreed upon by the Parties as liquidated
damages in Paragraph 6.5 and excluding losses covered by insurance required by
the Contract Documents, the Owner and the Contractor agree to waive all claims
against each other for any consequential damages that may arise out of or
relate to this Agreement, except for those specific items of damages excluded
from this waiver as mutually agreed upon by the Parties and identified
below. The Owner agrees to waive damages
including but not limited to the Owner's loss of use of the Project, any rental
expenses incurred, loss of income, profit or financing related to the Project,
as well as the loss of business, loss of financing, principal office overhead
and expenses, loss of profits not related to this Project, loss of reputation,
or insolvency. The Contractor agrees to
waive damages including but not limited to loss of business, loss of financing,
principal office overhead and expenses, loss of profits not related to this
Project, loss of bonding capacity, loss of reputation, or insolvency. The following items of damages are excluded
from this mutual waiver:
§6.6.1 The provisions of this Paragraph shall also
apply to the termination of this Agreement and shall survive such termination. The Owner and the Contractor shall require
similar waivers in contracts with Subcontractors and Others retained for the
project.
AIA - §15.1.6
CLAIMS FOR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES The Contractor and Owner waive Claims against
each other for consequential damages arising out of or relating to this
Contract. This mutual waiver includes
.1 damages
incurred by the Owner for rental expenses, for losses of use, income, profit,
financing, business and reputation, and for loss of management or employee
productivity or of the services of such persons; and
.2 damages
incurred by the Contractor for principal office expenses including the
compensation of personnel stationed there, for losses of financing, business
and reputation, and for loss of profit except anticipated profit arising
directly from the Work.
This mutual waiver is applicable, without
limitation, to all consequential damages due to either party’s termination in
accordance with Article 14. Nothing contained in this Section 15.1.6 shall be
deemed to preclude an award of liquidated damages, when applicable, in accordance
with the requirements of the Contract Documents.
EJCDC - §5.07 B & C - Waiver of Rights
B. Owner waives all
rights against Contractor, Subcontractors, and Engineer, and the officers,
directors, members, partners, employees, agents, consultants and subcontractors
of each and any of them for:
1.
loss due to business interruption, loss of use, or other
consequential loss extending beyond direct physical loss or damage to Owner’s
property or the Work caused by, arising out of, or resulting from fire or other
perils whether or not insured by Owner; and
2.
loss or damage to the completed Project or part thereof caused by,
arising out of, or resulting from fire or other insured peril or cause of loss
covered by any property insurance maintained on the completed Project or part
thereof by Owner during partial utilization pursuant to Paragraph 14.05, after
Substantial Completion pursuant to Paragraph 14.04, or after final payment
pursuant to Paragraph 14.07.
C. Any insurance
policy maintained by Owner covering any loss, damage or consequential loss
referred to in Paragraph 5.07.B shall contain provisions to the effect that in
the event of payment of any such loss, damage, or consequential loss, the
insurers will have no rights of recovery against Contractor, Subcontractors, or
Engineer, and the officers, directors, members, partners, employees, agents,
consultants and subcontractors of each and any of them.
Consequently, in drafting and negotiating a waiver of
consequential damages clause, the definition of what damages are or are not
considered “consequential” is of particular significance. While the waiver of any subset of damages by
contract tends to be cause for any construction lawyer’s concern, the waiver of
consequential damages warrant a frank discussion with both your client and the
other party to identify the risks each are truly concerned about and what
damages each seeks to avoid. More
discussion on consequential damages is often well worth the effort.
“No Damages For Delay”
In an attempt to shield themselves
against the potential for substantial dollar claims for delays, owners, with
increasing frequency, are including a clause in their contracts that sets out
that even if an excusable delay is encountered, no damages for delay will be
paid to the contractor. This clause is
known as a “no damages for delay” clause. The AIA (both the 1997 and 2007 editions),
ConsensusDOCS and EJCDC standard forms do not contain such clauses. Under these forms the “no damages for delay”
clause would be a completely manuscript term.
The
effect of such a clause is to provide a time extension as the exclusive remedy
to a delayed contractor, thereby eliminating the owner’s exposure to delay
damages. From the Owner’s perspective, a
“no damages for delay” clause is a major protective device against spiraling
construction costs. From the
contractor’s perspective, it is a major restriction on the ability of an
injured party to recover increased costs not reasonably anticipated when the
contract was entered into. In any event,
no damages for delay clauses are typically enforced by the courts, which
ultimately results of these types of clauses appearing in more and more
agreements.
Nevertheless,
because of the harshness of its effect, courts have fashioned some exceptions
to the enforceability of a “no damages for delay” clause, which will likely
stymie an otherwise well-drafted clause.
The five more notable exceptions include:
(1)
The
delay is beyond the original contemplation of the parties at the time the
contract was entered into;[31]
(2)
The
delay is for such a long period of time it becomes, in effect, an abandonment
of the contract;
(3)
The
delay results from bad faith, misrepresentation,
concealment, or arbitrary action by the
owner;
(4)
The
delay is the result of the owner's active interference; and
(5)
The
delay is the result of the owner's inaction in the face of an implied duty to
act (e.g., if the contractor was
delayed when the State failed to secure a right-of-way necessary for the
construction).[32]
Despite
these exceptions, however, the cases addressing “no damages for delay” clauses
have trended towards enforcement of the clauses. The underlying assumption of these decisions
is that the contractor considered the likelihood of delays at the time of
bidding and presumably extracted a higher price from the owner in return for
agreeing to the “no damages for delay” clause, and the owner is entitled to the
benefit of its bargain. In short, for
the contractor, the presence of a “no damages for delay” clause will cause it
to hedge against the risk of delay by factoring that contingency into its bid
price. Consequently, the owner must
consider whether the clause is always worth the extra cost? Alternatively, the owner may be able to
control the contractor’s hedged risk through establishing control of
contingencies.
When
drafting a “no damages for delay” clause, it is imperative, first and foremost,
that the clause clearly provides for an extension of time as the sole and
exclusive remedy in the event of delay.
Additionally, the parties should consider articulating the types of
damages that constitute “delay damages” precluded by the “no damages for delay”
clause. While a failure to adequately
define the scope of damages precluded do so may not render the clause
unenforceable, it will succeed in creating an ambiguity or fight over what is
and is not covered under the clause.
Indemnity
Indemnification is a quintessential contractual risk
allocation provision. The contractor agrees
to indemnify the owner and the architect/engineer for certain acts or omissions
on the part of the contractor and the contractor's subcontractors and suppliers. The
contractor, in turn, normally requires the subcontractor’s suppliers and
material men to indemnify the contractor.
As stated previously, an
indemnification clause is intended to get one party to indemnify, defend
and hold harmless another party for any negligence or other potential
liabilities. This clause imposes three separate obligations: (1) the duty to
indemnify against losses and damages; (2) the duty to hold harmless, which is
akin to a contractual bar, and means agreeing to not pursue claims back against
the party being indemnified; and (3) the duty to defend.
There are differing degrees of indemnity, all of which can
be drafted into the terms of the agreement.
Limited
indemnity provides indemnification only for damages caused by
the contractor’s (or indemnitor’s) sole negligence. Intermediate indemnity requires the
contractor (indemnitor) to indemnify against all losses to the indemnitee even
if that party may have also caused the harm.
Broad form indemnity requires indemnification against losses to the
indemnitee including those caused solely by the indemnitee.[33]
In the A201 General Conditions, the standard indemnity
provision is set out in §3.18.[34] It is an intermediary type of indemnity
provision, i.e., it requires
indemnification against all losses from the one party even though the other
party may be partly at fault also, but it does not require indemnification for
losses caused solely by the party being indemnified. Section 3.18 and its subparts state:
AIA - §3.18.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law the Contractor
shall indemnify and hold harmless the Owner, Architect, Architect’s
consultants, and agents and employees of any of them from and against claims,
damages, losses and expenses, including but not limited to attorneys’ fees,
arising out of or resulting from performance of the Work, provided that such
claim, damage, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease
or death, or to injury to or destruction of tangible property (other than the
Work itself), but only to the extent caused by the negligent acts or omissions
of the Contractor, a Subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by
them or anyone for whose acts they may be liable, regardless of whether or not
such claim, damage, loss or expense is caused in part by a party indemnified
hereunder. Such obligation shall not be construed to negate, abridge, or reduce
other rights or obligations of indemnity which would otherwise exist as to a
party or person described in this Section 3.18.
§3.18.2 In claims against
any person or entity indemnified under this Section 3.18 by an employee of the
Contractor, a Subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by them or
anyone for whose acts they may be liable, the indemnification obligation under
Section 3.18.1 shall not be limited by a limitation on amount or type of
damages, compensation or benefits payable by or for the Contractor or a
Subcontractor under workers’ compensation acts, disability benefit acts or
other employee benefit acts.
While the typical indemnification clause like §3.18.1 deals
with claims, damages, and losses involving personal injury or property damage,
indemnification clauses may provide that the Contractor indemnify the Owner
more than just personal injury and property loss. An expanded indemnification provision can
include such other items as (1) damage to the Work itself or to the existing
real property, (2) contractual performance losses, (3) economic loss damages;
and (4) attorney fees.
The ConsensusDOCS Indemnity Clause states:
ConsensusDOCS - §10.1 INDEMNITY
§10.1.1 To the fullest
extent permitted by law, the Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the
Owner, the Owner's officers, directors, members, consultants, agents and
employees, the Architect/Engineer and Others (the Indemnitees) from all claims
for bodily injury and property damage, other than to the Work itself and other
property insured under Subparagraph 10.3.1, including reasonable attorneys'
fees, costs and expenses, that may arise from the performance of the Work, but
only to the extent caused by the negligent acts or omissions of the Contractor,
Subcontractors or anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them or by
anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable. The Contractor shall be entitled to
reimbursement of any defense costs paid above Contractor's percentage of
liability for the underlying claim to the extent provided for under Subparagraph
10.1.2.
§10.1.2 To the fullest
extent permitted by law, the Owner shall indemnify and hold harmless the
Contractor, its officers, directors, members, consultants, agents, and
employees, Subcontractors or anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of
them or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable from all claims for
bodily injury and property damage, other than property insured under
Subparagraph 10.3.1, including reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and expenses,
that may arise from the performance of work by Owner, Architect/Engineer or
Others, but only to the extent caused by the negligent acts or omissions of the
Owner, Architect/Engineer or Others. The
Owner shall be entitled to reimbursement of any defense costs paid above
Owner's percentage of liability for the underlying claim to the extent provided
for under Subparagraph 10.1.1.
§10.1.3 NO LIMITATION ON LIABILITY In any and all claims against the Indemnitees by any
employee of the Contractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by the
Contractor or anyone for whose acts the Contractor may be liable, the
indemnification obligation shall not be limited in any way by any limitation on
the amount or type of damages, compensation or benefits payable by or for the
Contractor under Workers' Compensation acts, disability benefit acts or other
employment benefit acts.[35]
While EJCDC provides the following indemnification clause:
A.
To the fullest extent permitted by Laws and Regulations,
Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless Owner and Engineer, and the
officers, directors, members, partners, employees, agents, consultants and
subcontractors of each and any of them from and against all claims, costs,
losses, and damages (including but not limited to all fees and charges of
engineers, architects, attorneys, and other professionals and all court or
arbitration or other dispute resolution costs) arising out of or relating to
the performance of the Work, provided that any such claim, cost, loss, or
damage is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death, or to
injury to or destruction of tangible property (other than the Work itself),
including the loss of use resulting therefrom but only to the extent caused by
any negligent act or omission of Contractor, any Subcontractor, any Supplier,
or any individual or entity directly or indirectly employed by any of them to
perform any of the Work or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable .
B.
In any and all claims against Owner or Engineer or any of their officers,
directors, members, partners, employees, agents, consultants, or subcontractors
by any employee (or the survivor or personal representative of such employee)
of Contractor, any Subcontractor, any Supplier, or any individual or entity
directly or indirectly employed by any of them to perform any of the Work, or
anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, the indemnification obligation
under Paragraph 6.20.A shall not be limited in any way by any limitation on the
amount or type of damages, compensation, or benefits payable by or for
Contractor or any such Subcontractor, Supplier, or other individual or entity
under workers’ compensation acts, disability benefit acts, or other employee
benefit acts.
C.
The indemnification obligations of Contractor under Paragraph
6.20.A shall not extend to the liability of Engineer and Engineer’s officers,
directors, members, partners, employees, agents, consultants and subcontractors
arising out of:
1.
the preparation or approval of, or the failure to prepare or
approve maps, Drawings, opinions, reports, surveys, Change Orders, designs, or
Specifications; or
2.
giving directions or instructions, or failing to give them, if
that is the primary cause of the injury or damage.[36]
In addition to the “standard” indemnity clauses set forth
above, the new contract templates impose indemnity obligations in conjunction
with the handling of hazardous materials encountered on, or brought onto, the
project. All three standard contract
forms (ConsensusDOCS, AIA and EJCDC) have extensive Hazardous Materials clauses
that impose additional indemnity obligations that should be taken into
consideration in drafting and negotiating the contract.
The 2007 edition of the AIA A201, at ¶10.3.3, ¶10.3.5 and
¶10.3.6, requires the Contractor to indemnify
the Owner for the costs and expenses the Owner incurs (1) for remediation of
material that the Contractor brings to the site and negligently handles; or (2)
where the Contractor fails to perform its obligations under §10.3.1 (dealing
with Contractor encountered hazardous material or substance “not addressed in
the Contract Documents”), except to the extent that the costs and expenses are
due to the Owner’s fault or negligence.[37] This marks a fundamental shift from its 1997
predecessor, where the risk for hazardous materials was on the Owner.
The ConsensusDOCS, §3.13.6,
in contrast, provides that the Owner must indemnify the Contractor (as
well as its subcontractors) for all claims, damages, etc. “arising out of or
relating to the performance of the Work in any area affected by Hazardous
Material.”[38] The Contractor’s or subcontractor’s
negligence obviates this indemnity obligation of the Owner.
The EJCDC document, (§4.06(G) and §4.06(H), include
reciprocal indemnification requirements similar to those created under the AIA
documents. The Owner must indemnify the
Contractor for any claims or damages “arising out of or relating to a Hazardous
Environmental Condition, provided that such Hazardous Environmental Condition: (i) was not shown or indicated in the
Drawings or Specifications or identified in the Contract Documents to be
included within the scope of the Work, and (ii) was not created by Contractor
or by anyone for whom Contractor is responsible.”[39] The Contractor must indemnify the Owner for
any claims or damages “arising out of or relating to a Hazardous Environmental
Condition created by Contractor or by anyone for whom Contractor is
responsible.”[40]
From the contractor’s viewpoint, the primary goals in
negotiating an indemnification clause upstream with the owner are as follows:
(1)
Eliminate the duty
to defend the indemnified party. The defense obligation is a separate and
distinct obligation from the duties to indemnify and hold harmless. The duty to defend commences immediately even
while the underlying issue of fault is resolved through litigation or
arbitration. Also, by eliminating the
duty to defend while the lawsuit or proceeding is ongoing, the contractor keeps
everyone at risk until the final adjudication or decision, which allows the
contractor to maintain a better negotiating position on the claim.
(2)
Limit the scope of
the indemnity obligation. Limiting the scope of the clause to personal
injury and personal or tangible property damage claims results in not only a
reduced risk window but it also brings the claims within the coverage of the
typical CGL insurance of the contractor.
Conversely, the contractor should seek to avoid indemnifying against
economic loss damages, contract breaches, or damages to real property or
improvements, i.e., the work itself.
(3)
Eliminate attorney
fees and expert fees from the indemnity obligation. This can be a
significant cost on top of the underlying loss or damages being
indemnified. From the contractor’s
perspective, each party can bear its own costs of defense. Including the expert fees in the exclusion
likewise is beneficial because these costs can easily reach six figures on a
major loss.
(4)
Limit indemnity to
a pro-rata or comparative indemnity or causation. The contractor
wants to be responsible only to the extent that it is determined to be at
fault. This will significantly narrow
and lower the indemnity cost. It also
avoids the dilemma that the standard industry type of intermediate indemnity
clause creates of a situation where the contractor is 20% at fault and the
Owner or other parties to be indemnified are 80% at fault. Under an intermediate standard
indemnification clause, even though the parties to be indemnified are 80% at
fault, the contractor has to indemnify them all, in full. If there is a pro-rata or comparative
indemnity obligation, the contractor will only be responsible for 20% of the
loss or damages incurred.
(5)
Watch for hidden
indemnity obligations elsewhere in the Contract Documents. Often provisions
dealing with lien claims, hazardous materials, or environmental risks on site,
site safety (including OHSA citations and fines), code or regulatory compliance
violations, and assumed design liability if there is a design build component
to the work, can all impose an indemnity obligation on the contractor separate
and distinct from the formal indemnification article.
(6)
Finally, flow down
the risk. It is imperative that the contractor
expressly references the indemnification clauses and obligations in the
“assumption of duties” and “flow down” obligations of the subcontract(s). Otherwise, the contractor runs the risk of a
reviewing court/panel interpreting the indemnity clause as not otherwise being
included in the subcontract because it is not expressly referenced.
§ 6 Force Majeure
As a general rule, a contractor is liable for all costs incurred by an
owner as a result of the contractor's unexcused delay in completing a
project. Delays for which the contractor
does not assume responsibility in the contract are called “excusable” delays. Excusable delays usually include delays for
which the owner is responsible as well as delays specifically excused by the
contract that are not attributable to anyone's fault. The former are compensable, the latter are
not. The presence of an excusable delay
clause in the construction contract is critical to the contractor. If a delay is excusable under the contract
terms, the contractor need not pay the owner damages for the late completion
and is entitled to a time extension to complete the contract.
Force majeure is a type of excusable
delay. Force majeure is the concept of
excusing contractual performance as a result of unforeseen circumstances. Although force majeure clauses usually
encompass extraordinary events identified as “Acts of God,” the actual
application of the term may have a much wider or narrower scope, depending on
the wording of the specific contract clause at issue.[41] Defined more simply, the term force majeure
is an unforeseen, supervening event beyond the owner’s or contractor’s control.[42]
The force majeure doctrine is typically used to excuse
performance in the context of a project delay, rather than as support for a
delay claim. Over time, and depending on
the jurisdiction, the doctrine of force majeure has morphed or developed into
“physical impossibility,” then “frustration of purpose,” and (more recently) to
“commercial impracticability.”[43] These arguments are most frequently used in
the context of material price escalation cases, and they will be discussed in
more detail below.
The purpose of the force majeure clause in a contract is to
(1) allocate risk and (2) provide notice to the parties of events that may
suspend or excuse performance. Typical
force majeure events included in contract clauses are bad weather, war, Acts of
God, and political risks. Generally,
these clauses are structured to allow for an extension of time, but not
necessarily a price or equitable adjustment.
The industry standard documents typically include a force
majeure clause, or the equivalent. For
example, the ConsensusDOCS, EJCDC and AIA standard contract documents all
include a “force majeure clause” as part of their respective general delays and
extension of time article, but do not use the force majeure label.
Sample clauses from ConsensusDOCS 200, EJCDC C700 and AIA
A201 include:
ConsensusDOCS - §6.3 DELAYS AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME
§6.3.1 If the
Contractor is delayed at any time in the commencement or progress of the Work
by any cause beyond the control of the Contractor, the Contractor shall be
entitled to an equitable extension of the Contract Time. Examples of causes
beyond the control of the Contractor include, but are not limited to, the
following: acts or omissions of the Owner, the Architect/Engineer or Others;
changes in the Work or the sequencing of the Work ordered by the Owner, or
arising from decisions of the Owner that impact the time of performance of the
Work; transportation delays not reasonably foreseeable; labor disputes not
involving the Contractor; general labor disputes impacting the Project but not
specifically related to the Worksite; fire; terrorism, epidemics, adverse
governmental actions, unavoidable accidents or circumstances; adverse weather
conditions not reasonably anticipated; encountering Hazardous Materials; concealed
or unknown conditions; delay authorized by the Owner pending dispute
resolution; and suspension by the Owner under Paragraph 11.1. The Contractor
shall submit any requests for equitable extensions of Contract Time in
accordance with the provisions of Article 8.
EJCDC - 12.03 Delays
A. Where Contractor is
prevented from completing any part of the Work within the Contract Times due to
delay beyond the control of Contractor, the Contract Times will be extended in
an amount equal to the time lost due to such delay if a Claim is made therefor
as provided in Paragraph 12.02.A. Delays beyond the control of Contractor shall
include, but not be limited to, acts or neglect by Owner, acts or neglect of
utility owners or other contractors performing other work as contemplated by
Article 7, fires, floods, epidemics, abnormal weather conditions, or acts of
God.
...
C. If Contractor is delayed
in the performance or progress of the Work by fire, flood, epidemic, abnormal
weather conditions, acts of God, acts or failures to act of utility owners not
under the control of Owner, or other causes not the fault of and beyond control
of Owner and Contractor, then Contractor shall be entitled to an equitable
adjustment in Contract Times, if such adjustment is essential to Contractor’s
ability to complete the Work within the Contract Times. Such an adjustment
shall be Contractor’s sole and exclusive remedy for the delays described in
this Paragraph 12.03.C.
AIA §8.3.1 – DELAYS
AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME If
the Contractor is delayed at any time in the commencement or progress of the
Work by an act or neglect of the Owner or Architect, or of an employee of
either, or of a separate contractor employed by the Owner; or by changes
ordered in the Work; or by labor disputes, fire, unusual delay in deliveries,
unavoidable casualties or other causes beyond the Contractor’s control; or by
delay authorized by the Owner pending mediation and arbitration; or by other
causes that the Architect determines may justify delay, then the Contract Time
shall be extended by Change Order for such reasonable time as the Architect may
determine.
AIA - § 8.3.2 Claims relating to time shall be made in accordance with
applicable provisions of Article 15.
AIA - § 8.3.3 This Section 8.3 does not preclude recovery of damages for delay
by either party under other provisions of the Contract Documents.
Enforceability of a force
majeure clause is determined by the intent of the parties, which is evidenced
by the language in the contract.[44] The specificity of the force majeure clause
is crucial when seeking to excuse nonperformance. A party will typically only be excused from
performance if the clause itself specifically and expressly includes the event
alleged to have prevented performance.
Generally, the parties are free to define force majeure
events however they wish. The contractor
will push for a broad definition of force majeure events, such as inclement
weather. The owner, on the other hand,
will want a very tight or narrow definition of force majeure. For example, the owner should condition the
inclusion of inclement weather as a force majeure event on the contractor’s
ability to establish that the weather was severe or unusual enough that it
would not normally be expected in the area.
However, the owner should be mindful of the likely premium in the
contract price the owner will pay if it wants a contractor to assume the risk
of any force majeure event on a project, as the Contractor will add
contingencies into his bid price. Due to
the number of risks involved in the performance of a contract, parties
typically agree to a broad, general force majeure clause. Both parties should take into consideration
the relief sought – affirmative claim relief (i.e. recovery of increased costs), an extension of the contract
time, or both.
§ 7 Price Escalation Clauses
Material price increases has been a hot button issue in the
construction industry with steel and copper in recent years as the cost of
materials experienced dramatic and sudden spikes due to increased consumption,
shortages of raw materials, and limited shipping capacity.
Many contractors faced severe financial consequences as a
result of the increases, and were forced to seek price adjustments to their
contracts, which in most cases did not have price escalation clauses for that
purpose. General Contractors with their
subcontractors and Owners fought to enforce their fixed price contracts. The general rule is that without a price
escalation clause, the contractor bears the financial risk of increased
material prices.[45]
There are three different types of escalation clauses, each
based upon a different method of pricing the material increase: the invoice
method, the index method, and the combination method.[46] Under the invoice method, bids, quotes, invoices
or letters from the supplier are used to substantiate the material price
escalation from the time the contract was signed to the time of the actual
purchase. Under the index method, a
designated price index guide, such as that of the U.S. Department of Labor or
MEPS (International), Ltd., is used to determine changes in price. Under the combination method, the parties
agree on a contract price based upon the contractor’s estimate for the raw
materials from the supplier. At the time
that the contractor actually purchases the raw materials, if the supplier’s
price has increased by more than a specified percent (e.g., 5%), that increase is added to the contract price, but the
contractor absorbs the initial price (i.e.,
up to 4.99%).[47] None of the three standard form documents
discussed herein have specific price escalation clauses. However, all three forms are designed so that
they can be modified to fit each project’s and its parties’ needs.
Additionally, in drafting a price escalation clause, both
parties must review all contract terms in the context of a price escalation
issue, as there may be other clauses that are general or broad enough to
encompass price increases such as the changed conditions clause. Also, from a contractor perspective, be aware
of express clauses that prevent recovery for increased price increases and
specifically state that a contractor assumes the risk for increased materials
costs.
§ 8 Liquidated
Damages
Proving
the amount of delay damages is often a difficult task. For that reason, contracts frequently include
a provision for “liquidated damages” to be calculated on a per diem basis for
every day that completion is delayed. In
that regard, liquidated damages are basically a pre-arranged fixed amount of
damages assessed for each day of delay.
For example, a contractor who is five days late in finishing a project
under a contract that has a $1,000.00 per day liquidated damages clause will be
liable to the owner in the amount of $5,000.00, regardless of what the owner's
actual damages may be.
Liquidated
damages clauses can be beneficial to an owner who otherwise may have difficulty
in precisely proving its actual losses.
This is particularly true in the case of a public owner, which would not
typically have lost profit or lost use types of damages. Conversely, while often in the minority of
situations, liquidated damages actually can be equally useful to the contractor
by limiting the contractor’s exposure for actual delay damages, which can
sometimes far exceed the per diem amount.
Liquidated damages clauses may also
serve to cap the takeover surety’s liability for delay damages, shielding the
surety against exposure of the owner’s claims for consequential delay damages.[48]
The ConsensusDOCS
form makes liquidated damages available to the parties as an option to be
selected by the parties:
ConsensusDOCS
- §6.5 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES
§6.5.1 SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION The Owner and the Contractor agree that this Agreement
_____ shall/_____ shall not (indicate one) provide for the imposition of
liquidated damages based on the Date of Substantial Completion.
§6.5.1.1 The
Contractor understands that if the Date of Substantial Completion established
by this Agreement, as may be amended by subsequent Change Order, is not
attained, the Owner will suffer damages which are difficult to determine and
accurately specify. The Contractor
agrees that if the Date of Substantial Completion is not attained the
Contractor shall pay the Owner __________ Dollars ($__________) as liquidated
damages and not as a penalty for each Days that Substantial Completion extends
beyond the Date of Substantial Completion.
The liquidated damages provided herein shall be in lieu of all liability
for any and all extra costs, losses, expenses, claims, penalties and any other
damages of whatsoever nature incurred by the Owner which are occasioned by any
delay in achieving the Date of Substantial Completion.
§6.5.2 FINAL COMPLETION
The Owner and the Contractor agree that this Agreement _____ shall/_____ shall
not (indicate one) provide for the imposition of liquidated damages based on
the Date of Final Completion.
§6.5.2.1 The
Contractor understands that if the Date of Final Completion established by this
Agreement, as may be amended by subsequent Change Order is not attained, the
Owner will suffer damages which are difficult to determine and accurately
specify. The Contractor agrees that if
the Date of Final Completion is not attained the Contractor shall pay the Owner
__________ Dollars ($ __________) as liquidated damages and not as a penalty
for each Days that Final Completion extends beyond the Date of Final
Completion. The liquidated damages
provided herein shall be in lieu of all liability for any and all extra costs,
losses, expenses, claims, penalties and any other damages of whatsoever nature
incurred by the Owner which are occasioned by any delay in achieving the Date
of Final Completion.
§6.5.3 OTHER LIQUIDATED DAMAGES The Owner and the Contractor may agree upon the imposition
of liquidated damages based on other project milestones or performance
requirements. Such agreement shall be
included as an exhibit to this Agreement.
In contrast, the AIA and EJCDC forms contemplate the
inclusion of a liquidated damages provision in the Contract Documents, but only
as a manuscript clause.[49]
There
is a judicial reluctance to rewrite the parties' negotiated terms of contract,
including a liquidated damages clause, which is an expression of the parties’
determination of the economic impact of delay.
Therefore, as a general rule, courts will enforce liquidated damages
clauses so long as the damages are not viewed as a penalty.[50] Whether the provision is upheld or is deemed
to be unenforceable as a penalty depends upon the particular circumstances
surrounding each contract. If the
liquidated damages are grossly disproportionate to the actual damages sustained
by the aggrieved party, or are unreasonable or unconscionable in excess of the
loss sought to be avoided, the damages will be considered as a penalty, and the
liquidated damages clause will not be enforced.[51]
Thus,
in negotiating a liquidated damages provision, the per diem amount must be
proportionate to the estimated actual damages that could be sustained by the owner.
While the parties will obviously not have concrete supporting data for
actual damages, it is good business practice to incorporate into the clause and
per diem amount some basis or supporting data for their ascertainment, as this
is an obvious ground for attack in enforcing the clause.
§ 9 Incentive Clauses
In contrast to liquidated damages provisions, which seek to
“incentivize” performance with penalties, incentive clauses encourage early or
cost efficient performance with monetary rewards. There are two basic types of incentive
clauses – the early completion bonus and a shared savings provision.
The early completion bonus provides a monetary incentive to
the contractor to complete its work prior to the contractual completion
date. Both the need for an early
completion bonus and the structure of the arrangement are driven by the value
of early completion of the project to the owner. For example, on road projects or major retail
construction, the owner has both political and pecuniary motives for opening
the project early. Incentive clauses can
be structured a number of ways. The
incentive can be either a lump sum amount based upon a benchmark early
completion date, or a per diem amount allotted for each day prior to the
contractual completion date. In the case
of the latter, the clause operates as almost a reverse liquidated damages
provision. Also, some owners will place
a cap on the total incentive amount.
It is important to note that typically there is no sharing
of the savings of early completion under an early completion clause. The contractor receives all of the monetary
benefit. The owner receives its project
earlier.
The second common type of incentive clause is the shared
savings clause. This type of clause is
often used in conjunction with a cost plus contract or GMP. If the contractor brings the project to
completion under a pre-set cost threshold, the shared savings compared to the
original project budget or fee is realized as an incentive. From a contract-drafting standpoint, the key
is what happens to the shared savings?
Are they shared with the owner or do they inure solely to the
contractor?
The industry standard forms typically do not include
incentive clauses in the base agreements.
However, some of the new integrated or collaborative documents do
incorporate a pain-share, gain-share concept.
Conclusion
As the above issues demonstrate, there is no singular
approach to these key contract clauses.
The final negotiated clause will be driven by the parties’ perspective
(including their prior project experience in working under one or more sets of
industry forms), risk philosophies and processes, the circumstances of the
given project, and the parties’ relative bargaining power. While the latter can certainly dictate less
desirable results for the contractor, an understanding of the key issues and
attendant risk in those issues can help both parties to better draft a
construction contract that effectively, and acceptably, manages that risk
consistent with each participant’s risk assessment techniques, philosophies and
management processes. Although the
industry forms provide guidance for many of the clauses discussed, this is not
always the case. When combined with the
fact that most industry templates are significantly modified, such an
understanding of the issues and attendant risk become ever more important.
[1] All clause
references to and quotations from the AIA standard documents are from the AIA
A201-2007 General Condition of the Contract for Construction unless otherwise
noted.
[2] All clause
references to and quotations from the ConsensusDOCS standard documents are from
the ConsensusDOCS 200 Standard Agreement and General Conditions Between Owner
and Contractor.
[3] All clause
references to and quotations from the EJCDC standard documents are from the
EJCDC C700 Standard General Conditions of the Construction Contract.
[4] Warranty (¶3.8.1 ConsensusDOCS 200. The
corresponding warranty term in the ConsensusDOCS 750 Subcontract is ¶3.21.
[5]
[6] Correction of Work Within One Year
(Art.3.9). See ¶3.22.2 for the ConsensusDOCS 750 Subcontract corresponding
correction terms and conditions.
[7]
[8] ConsensusDOCS, Par.
3.9.6.
[9] Warranty re: workmanship and no defects (¶3.5.1,
1997 and ¶3.5 2007 AIA A201). The
corresponding warranty term in the A401 Subcontract is ¶4.5.1.
[10] AIA A201 General
Conditions (2007 Edition), Par. 3.5.
[11] AIA A201, Par.
12.1, 12.2.
[12] AIA A201, Par.
12.2; For an example of a construction statute of repose, see e.g. IC 32-15-1-2 (2008).
[13] EJCDC C-700 ¶6.19
and 6.03B respectively.
[14] EJCDC C-700 §14.03; ConsensusDOCS, Par.
9.2.2; AIA A201 Par. 9.3.3.
[15] AIA A201, Par.7.2.
[16] AIA A201, Par. 7.3.
[17] AIA A201, Par. 7.4.
[18]
[19] EJCDC C-700 §3.04 –
Amending and Supplementing Contract Documents.
[20] See ConsensusDOCS § 8.3; AIA A201,
Par.7.3; EJCDC C-700 §10.01.
[21]
[22] ConsensusDOCS §
8.3.3.
[23]
[24] Local law can also
drive the preparation and negotiation of a differing site conditions
clause. For example,
[25] See ConsensusDOCS §3.16.2.
[26] EJCDC C-700 §4.03.
[27] A typical site investigation clause is set
forth in ¶3.2.1 of the 1997 AIA General Conditions of the Contract for
Construction (AIA Document A201, 1997 ed.), which states:
3.2.1 Since the Contract Documents are
complementary, before starting each portion of the Work, the Contractor shall
carefully study and compare the various Drawings and other Contract Documents
relative to that portion of the Work, as well as the information furnished by
the Owner pursuant to Subparagraph 2.2.3, shall take field measurements of any
existing conditions related to that portion of the Work and shall observe any
conditions at the site affecting it.
These obligations are for the purpose of facilitating construction by
the Contractor and are not for the purpose of discovering errors,
omissions, or inconsistencies in the Contract Documents; however, any errors,
inconsistencies or omissions discovered by the Contractor shall be reported
promptly to the Architect as a request for information in such form as the
Architect may require.
[28] Sergent Mechanical Systems v.
[29] Morrison-Knudsen
Co., Inc. v.
[30] See Blakenship Constr. Co. v.
[31] Landis & Gyr Powers, Inc. v. Berley
Industries, 298 A.D.2d 435 (N.Y.A.D. 2002).
[32] J.A. Jones Construction Company v.
Lehrer McGovern Bovis, Inc., 89 P.3d 1009 (
[33] Note that some states, such as
[34]
The corresponding indemnity provision in the A401 Subcontract is found
at ¶4.6, and tracks the same concepts as that found in the A201.
[35] ConsensusDOCS 200.
[36]
EJCDC C-700.
[37]
AIA A201 - 2007 General Conditions,
[38]
ConsensusDOCS §3.13.6.
[39]
EJCDC - §4.06(G).
[40]
EJCDC - §4.06(H).
[41] (See Kerry Powell, What is Force Majeure?, Heavy
Construction News 110 (June 2001).
[42] See
Richard J. Ruszat II, Force Majeure, 104:5 Bus. Credit 54 (May 1, 2002). Force majeure provides “a flexible concept
that permits the parties to formulate an agreement to address their unique
course of dealings and industry idiosyncrasies.”
[43] If
the contract is able to be performed, but the underlying purpose of the contract no longer exists, the concept of
frustration of purpose is implicated.
Wm. Cary Wright, Force Majeure
Delays
[44] R&B
Falcon Corp. v. American Exploration Co., 154 F.Supp. 2d 969, 973 (S.D.
[45] See
Appeal of B&W Press,
G.P.O.C.A.B. 9-83; Glopak Corp. v. United
States, 851 F.2d 334 (U.S. Ct. App. 1988).
The doctrines of impossibility, impracticability and frustration of
purpose have also been used to argue force majeure cases, including price
increases.
[46] Khanh Josephson and Nicole Liguori Micklich,
Material Price Escalation Clauses, Construct! (Summer 2006). This article contains a good discussion of
material price escalation clauses, including sample material price escalation
clauses.
[47] See
[48] United
State Fidelity and Guaranty Co. v. West Rock Develop. Corp., 50 F.Supp.2d 127 (D.
[49] See e.g., AIA A201 General Conditions (2007 Edition), Par. 15.1.6 (“Nothing
contained in this Section 15.1.6 shall be deemed to preclude an award of
liquidated damages, when applicable, in accordance with the requirements of the
Contract Documents.”); see also EJCDC
§14.07C1 (“Payment Becomes Due: Thirty days after the presentation to Owner…
less any sum Owner is entitled to set off against Engineer’s recommendation,
including but not limited to liquidated damages…”)
[50] See
e.g., Raymundo v.
[51]