Thomas, H R; Smith, G R and Wright, D E (1991) Legal aspects of oral change orders. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 117(1), pp. 148-162. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper describes the legal aspects of oral change orders or directives. It provides basic criteria for an owner, contract administrator, or contractor to determine if an oral directive is valid, entitling the contractor to additional compensation. The criteria are based on common law rules extracted from a review of more than 70 appellate court cases. The rules provide that for an oral directive to be valid, there must be no statutes requiring a written change, the owner must have knowledge of the work, and he must know that the contractor is expecting compensation for the additional work. A promise to pay cannot be rescinded. Other aspects discussed include proper or apparent authority and waiver. The case law review revealed substantial consistency in the application of these rules, and no discernible differences were found between the public and private sectors. The rules are arranged in an easy-to-follow flowchart, and numerous case citations are included. Recommended practices are also included.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | statute, change order, private sector, contract administrator, compensation, case law, owner |
| Subjects: | legal systems, dispute resolution, industry analysis, practitioner, contractual condition, sociology |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Stakeholder Management, Legal Issues, Roles and Professions, Contract Administration |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here