Liquidated Damages Are Very Essential in Construction Law - Coursework Example

Name Class Instructor Institution City State Date Table of Contents Introduction 3 Construction contracts 3 Work completion 4 Partial completion 5 The delay issue in construction projects 6 Passable and Inexcusable Delays 6 Compensable Delays 7 Simultaneous Delays 8 Advantages 8 Disadvantages 10 Conclusion 11 References 13 Introduction Liquidated damages are very essential in construction law as it reduces the conflicts between the owner and the contractor. Liquidated damages are the costs given to a party who has been injured upon breach of a contract. In this report, it discusses the meaning of liquidated damages; differentiate the difference between different types of damages. The report further explains the delay issues on contraction and advantages and disadvantages of the liquidated damages to both the owner and contractor. This will be explained in reference to case laws and the books available on law. Construction contracts According to Whaley( 2015) he says Construction contracts explains dates for the contractor to Possession of the site that is called the starting date and the date for Regular progress by the work also called the phases of the contacts dates and handover of the completed work date. For construction to be completed can either be by practical completion of the project in which the customer can occupy and own the project or by completion of parts of the contract by the owner. When contractor is unable to deliver within the specified time results to bleach of contract and the owner of the project in this case can sue for damages (Thomas, 1995). Damages are sum of cash (concurred and recorded into an agreement) determined as the aggregate sum of pay a wronged gathering ought to get, if the other party breaks certain part(s) of the agreement (Cushman, 1999). The agreement likewise builds up what activities or disappointments to act constitute a break. For the consent to be lawfully enforceable, the nature of the agreement ought to be such that it is hard to decide real damages, and the measure of damages ought to be sensible in light of the current situation. Generally, law might see the predetermined sum as a penalty (incorporated into the agreement essentially to drive its appropriate execution) and not a pay for harm (Hughes, 2015) Generally damages are liquidated if they cause injury that is quantifiable, the amount is reasonable and he actually participated in causing the damage and that the damages act as damages rather than penalties. If the damages do not meet the above are criteria they are referred to as void and invalid. Damages are compensations for losses or injury incurred by either of the parties in the contract when either breaks the contracts, this depend on the breach of the contract but liquidated damages are different as it is a term that is included in the contracts to be used to ensure that the parties are paid for damages especially in cases where actual damages cannot be ascertained (Arditi, 1997. Time is very essential especially in determining the start and end of the projects, in contract law the employer must enable asses of the contractor to the site in start of the project this however can be delayed up to less than six weeks (Alpin, 2010). After the possession of the site the contractor can plan his work regardless the contract guides him on the plan events. The contractor must ensure that he finishes the project within specified time. Kitson vs Mathew explains that the contractor can choose on how the contract has to be implemented (Arditi, 2006) Work completion The date of completion of the project is fixed on the start of the contract and cannot be extended the contractors has to ensure that he delivers as per the stipulated time either as practical completion of part completion (Horan, 1996). Similar law applies to the subcontractors they should also deliver within the stipulated time. Some of contracts include clauses such as tome of essence hence lack of delivery on right time results to damages to be paid to the employer (Sweet, 1972.) In completion the employer takes ownership of the site and the correction period starts and it is when the contractors insurance ends. In contracts the employers retains some of contractor’s money and are issued after the practical completion of the project (Carty, 1995). In the contract part completion is always anticipated and planned earlier with different dates, date extensions and damages on each case (Goetz, 1977). in the event that postpone to one segment causes a deferral to a resulting area then the agreement should make sufficient procurement for an expansion of time in those circumstances (Edlin, 2003) For instance, if the agreement is for the restoration of two pieces of pads and it expects segment one being finished before exchange of the inhabitants to permit area two to continue, then any customer postponements in segment one will directly affect the fruition of segment two (Smith, 2002) Partial completion In partial completion Zaghloul, ( 2003) says in some cases the customer would wish to take ownership of part of the works despite the fact that this is not particularly expected by the agreement records. On the off chance that, for instance, while developing a square of pads, the customer offers the penthouse suite to a buyer who requires a considerable measure of changes to be made, which might postpone finish of that suite, the customer might wish to take ownership of alternate pads that have as of now been finished with a specific end goal to finish the offers of those pads as quickly as time permits (Rubin, 1983). For this situation the customer can take fractional ownership of a characterized extent of works (e.g. the finished floors) before the fills in all in all are finished. Halfway ownership must be brought with the assent of the temporary worker however that assent may not for the most part be nonsensically withheld (Kraiem, 1987). For instance the temporary worker would not be qualified for withhold his agree so as to enhance his haggling position in a different disagreement about instalment however would have the capacity to do as such if, for instance, he could demonstrate that control of obviously finished ranges would frustrate his capacity to finish the remaining regions (Sweeney, 2015 ) . Klee, (2015) explains cases of courses in which occupation could impede consummation would be if occupation required the temporary worker to constrain the measure of clamour or clean made, or if the contractual worker was confined from chipping away at mains administrations or if occupation required the support of emergency exit courses through the contractual worker's working territories and such like (Ayres, 2012) The delay issue in construction projects The success any project depends to a great extent on the construction plan and whether that pan is met. Delays in the development plan contrarily affect both owner and contractor. Delays cause owners to retain extra expenses by not having the capacity to utilize or involve their property for its planned reason (Sandgrund, 2015). Postpones contrarily affect contractor workers by driving up the expenses of development coming about because of paying for a workforce. Some of delays that can be incurred include Passable and Inexcusable Delays Similarly as with most development tasks, the development contract as a rule figures out if a development deferral is passable or not. Normally, passable postponements are deferrals that outcome from occasions that are past the temporary worker's control. Cases of these sorts of deferrals include: demonstrations of God (power majeure), unexpected extreme climate, unforeseen site conditions, outline mistakes, work debate/strikes, and proprietor coordinated change orders (Thomas, 1995). Contingent upon the express terms of the agreement, when these sorts of postponements are experienced, the agreement consummation time is regularly reached out without remuneration to the proprietor. On the other hand, inexcusable delays are postponements brought about by occasions that are inside of the control of the contractual worker (Smith, 1892). Illustrations of these sorts of postponements include: delays brought about by expected climate conditions, dishonourable planning by the temporary worker, lacking workforce staffing, poor supervision, and delays connected with the repairs of the contractual worker's imperfect work. Contingent upon the particular terms of the development get, these deferrals are in many cases compensable to the owner. Compensable Delays On account of reasonable postponements, a contractual worker might be repaid by the proprietor by the stipend of extra time to finish the undertaking. The extra time to finish the task regularly brings about the instalments of extra cash to the temporary worker to take care of its extra expenses and overhead acquired as an aftereffect of being on an undertaking for a more extended timeframe (Cohen, 1961). On account of Compensable, the proprietor might be repaid by the instalment of genuine harms caused as an aftereffect of the postponements. Court might regard the sold harms statement to be void as an unenforceable punishment. Kole v. Parker Yale Dev. Co., 536 P.2d 848 (Colo. App. 1975). In such an occasion, on the other hand, the owner might in any case be qualified for recuperate its provable real delay coming about because of the delay (Stokes, 1990). Simultaneous Delays Simultaneous delays happen when both sides bear a portion of the obligation regarding the project delays or when there are different postponements that happen amid the same period. Here, on the grounds that both sides are at deficiency, most courts find that neither one of the parties is qualified for money related pay. In those circumstances, be that as it may, most courts will include time for the consummation of the task (Callahan, 2010). A liquidated damages clause can be a capable solution for proprietor/contractor problems to ensure itself against deferred finish by its temporary worker. On the other hand, its assurance is not fool proof. Liquidated damages condition ought to be precisely drafted to dodge it being understood as an unenforceable punishment and to guarantee that it is material to the broadest scope of circumstances. Also, the proprietor ought to consider how its activities and different circumstances amid the life of the undertaking might affect its capacity to recuperate these apparently ironclad harms; else, it might find that what appears to be complete might be, actually, deceptive Advantages Some of advantages of LAD to both employer and the contractor are: Employer 1. Certainty. The contractor will know in advance how much it would have to pay to the employer should it finish late. Liquidated damages clauses are an exhaustive agreement regarding the damages that are or are not to be paid by the contractor in the event of his failure to complete the contract on time: Temloc Ltd v Errill Properties. Therefore, if the contractor finds itself facing (or in) in period of culpable delay it can decide whether or not the costs of recovering the delay, assuming such a recovery is possible, are worth incurring, safe in the knowledge that the employer cannot recover further damages should its actual losses prove to be more than the amount recovered as liquidated damages (Dunbar, 1959). 2. saves time The contractor is spared the need to spend managerial time and effort in dealing with a common law claim for damages by the employer. Liquidated damages also save money that is to be spent on the litigation process or other amicable solutions 3. Speeds up the recovery process A liquidated damages provision in the main contract makes it simpler and speedier for the contractor to recover delay damages from any sub-contractors responsible for the contractor being delayed. In cases where there was no clause the process would take time in evaluating the damages the company had incurred. This clauses also assist in solving issues especially if the company had subcontracted the project. 4. able to set damages regarding delays Building contracts are influenced by commercial realities. It may therefore be the case that in order to obtain the best possible construction price from bidders employers are reluctant to set liquidated damages at a level that truly reflects the loss they are likely to incur if late completion occurs. Contractor Applying temloc v errill, the ldp can be valuable to contractors. As liquidated damages will by and large give a thorough solution for deferrals to consummation, the contractual worker will have the advantage of knowing at the beginning of the venture precisely the amount it will need to pay on the off chance that it is not ready to finish the works inside of the employer's due date. A contractual worker will frequently be in a position to arrange the rate of exchanged harms, together with a top on liability, and take into consideration the danger generally consummation in its offer cost. Disadvantages Some of disadvantages of LAD are: Employer Exchanged damages are considered a punishment, it will be open for an employer to either depend on its case for the punishment and demonstrate its misfortunes, in which case it can't recuperate more than the punishment or, overlook the punishment and seek after for liquidated damages, the impact being the same, despite the fact that with the last, it might be qualified for harms if demonstrated in abundance of the punishment. On the other hand, there is a solid contention that, in such circumstances an employer ought not be qualified for recuperate more than it has stipulated for in the agreement, and it is general believed that an employer won't be qualified for to do as such (Jervis, 1988). Contractor 1. Because the remedy is considered exhaustive, there is no opportunity to recover more in the event that the employer’s actual loss exceeds the sum stipulated as liquidated damages. In some cases the contractor is at a loss 2. There is the risk that a desire to obtain low bids from tenderers could tempt the employer into stipulating a damages amount less than it properly ought to be. This is because the damages stipulated are relative to the cost of the project, low contractor bids will result to low damages. To avoid this, owner has to accept high price bids which are expensive and some cases un affordable. 3. If the sum stipulated is unconscionable or extravagant it may be declared a penalty and therefore unrecoverable as liquidated damages. The employer will then be obliged to seek to recover its losses by way of a claim for damages at common law: Rapid Building Group v Ealing Family Housing Association. 4 The liquidated damages provision is for the benefit of the employer, it will therefore be construed strictly and contra proferentem. Therefore, the right to deduct or claim liquidated damages will be lost if the employer fails to operate properly any terms of the contract relating to the deduction of liquidated damages, or if the employer fails to grant extensions of time as required by the contract (Rea, 1984.) Conclusion Liquidated damages help the parties’ to seek redress in case one of the companies does not follow its part of the bargain. These damages are mainly caused by delays and some of the delays are compensable while others are not compensable. Liquidated damages are very essential in every contract as they reduce the disadvantages of entering contracts with them hence protect the parties and enhance advantages associated with them. Components permitting augmentations of time are not just for the contractual worker's advantage. In the event that there was no such component and a deferral happened which was not the contractual worker's issue, and then the temporary worker could never again be required to finish the works by the fruition date and would just need to finish the works in a "sensible" time. With no enforceable culmination date, the customer would lose any capacity to assert exchanged harms. References 1. Goetz, C.J. and Scott, R.E., 1977. Liquidated damages, penalties and the just compensation principle: Some notes on an enforcement model and a theory of efficient breach. Columbia Law Review, pp.554-594. 2. Edlin, A.S. and Schwartz, A., 2003. Optimal penalties in contracts. Chi.-Kent L. Rev., 78, p.33. 3. Eggleston, B., 2009. Liquidated damages and extensions of time: in construction contracts. John Wiley & Sons. 4. Smith, G., 2002. The" prevention principle" and conditions precedent: recent Australian developments. International Construction Law Review, 19(3), pp.397-404. 5. Zaghloul, R. and Hartman, F., 2003. Construction contracts: the cost of mistrust. International Journal of Project Management, 21(6), pp.419-424. 6. Rubin, R.A., 1983. Construction claims: analysis, presentation, defense. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. 7. Kraiem, Z.M. and Diekmann, J.E., 1987. Concurrent delays in construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 113(4), pp.591-602. 8. Rea, S.A., 1984. Efficiency implications of penalties and liquidated damages. The Journal of Legal Studies, pp.147-167. 9. Jervis, B.M. and Levin, P., 1988. Construction law, principles and practice. McGraw-Hill College. 10. Cushman, R.F. and Myers, J.J., 1999. Construction law handbook (Vol. 2). Aspen Publishers Online. 11. Cohen, H.A., 1961. Public construction contracts and the law. FW Dodge Corp.. 12. Sweet, J., 1972. Liquidated Damages in California. California Law Review, pp.84-145. 13. Arditi, D. and Pattanakitchamroon, T., 2006. Selecting a delay analysis method in resolving construction claims. International Journal of Project Management, 24(2), pp.145-155. 14. alpin, D.W., 2010. Construction management. John Wiley & Sons. 15. Dunbar Jr, F.C., 1959. Drafting the Liquidated Damage Clause--When and How. Ohio St. LJ, 20, p.221. 16. Arditi, D., Khisty, C.J. and Yasamis, F., 1997. Incentive/disincentive provisions in highway contracts. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 123(3), pp.302-307. 17. Horan, J.P., 1996. Preparing the client for mediation. Constr. Law., 16, p.38. 18. Carty, G.J., 1995. Construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 121(3), pp.319-328. 19. Ayres, I., 2012. Studies in Contract Law. Foundation Press. 20. Stokes, M., 1990. Construction law in contractor's language. McGraw-Hill Companies. 21. Callahan, M.T., 2010. Construction delay claims. Aspen Publishers. 22. Smith, Clarence G.T., "Penalties and Liquidated Damages with Special Reference to the Law in New York" (1892). Historical Thses and Dissertations Collection. Paper 274 23. Thomas, H.R., Smith, G.R. and Cummings, D.J., 1995. Enforcement of liquidated damages. Journal of construction engineering and management, 121(4), pp.459-463. 24. Thomas, H.R., Smith, G.R. and Cummings, D.J., 1995. Enforcement of liquidated damages. Journal of construction engineering and management, 121(4), pp.459-463. 25. Sandgrund, R.M. and Seidman, J.A., 2015. Unique Construction Defect Damages Mitigation Issues. Colorado Lawyer, 44(2), p.33. 26. Hughes, W., Champion, R. and Murdoch, J., 2015. Construction contracts: law and management. Routledge. 27. Klee, L., 2015. International Construction Contract Law. John Wiley & Sons. 28. Sandgrund, R.M. and Seidman, J.A., 2015. Unique Construction Defect Damages Mitigation Issues. Colorado Lawyer, 44(2), p.33. 29. Sweeney, N.J., 2015. Construction law update. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. 30. Whaley, A., McAdam, B. and Crowe, P., 2015. The acceleration dilemma: can English law accommodate constructive acceleration?. International Journal of Law in the Built Environment, 7(3), pp.248-267. Read More