Thomas, H R; Smith, G R and Ponderlick, R M (1992) Resolving contract disputes based on misrepresentations. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 118(3), pp. 472-487. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper describes in a clear and understandable way the primary rules of law that are applied to construction contract disputes involving the misrepresentation of concealed or subsurface conditions. The rules are based on the judicial inquiries derived from more than 45 appellate court decisions. The rules are presented in the form of questions to be asked by contractors and contract administrators. The application of these questions should result in a correct determination of the dispute. The questions are organized in an easy-to-understand flow chart. The roles of the soil report and site visit and disclaimers clauses are also explained. The rules were tested using another 10 case decisions. The results show considerable consistency in the law and that the outcome is entirely dependent on the facts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | dispute, contract administrator, construction contract, disclaimer |
| Subjects: | contract type, dispute resolution, contractual condition, practitioner |
| Topics: | Procurement, Legal Issues, Contract Administration, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 1 P |
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