|
Illinois Construction Law
Construction Law
Construction in modernity is vastly different from construction
in antiquity. The Bible does not mention Noah being
sued when he built the Ark, and evidently he made no
claim for flood damage. The pyramids of ancient Egypt
took 20 years to build and necessitated the labor of
100,000 people, yet no delay of damages suit ensued.
Similarly, there is perhaps no greater example of design
defect than the Leaning Tower of Pisa, but history
holds no record of the lawsuit that should have resulted.
Those litigious-absent days evidently are gone forever.
Today, the owner sues the contractor, and vice versa.
Contractors and subcontractors sue each other, and
all parties carry insurance to cover a multitude of
liability issues. Each party's respective theories
of entitlement, and a construction law overview, are
covered in this section.
Hiring a Contractor
Awarding a construction contract to a single contractor
is the archetypal construction project situation. Here,
the owner contracts with the general contractor for
the completion of the entire project and the general
contractor, in turn, contracts with various subcontractors
for the completion of various aspects of the project
(e.g. electrical, mechanical and plumbing work). It
is the responsibility of the general contractor to
coordinate the activities of the various subcontractors,
and the project is built in accordance with the plans
and specifications provided by the owner.
Contracting construction work typically involves either
the direct hiring of a contractor or competitive bidding
among different contractors. Government contracts differ
from nongovernment contracts in that private sector
contracts have few constraints, while public sector
contracts involve extensive regulations imposed by
the government.
Private sector construction contracts may either be
directly hired or bid upon. The direct hiring of a
contractor is the hiring of a contractor at the individual's
own discretion. Competitive bidding gives all contractors
a chance to bid on the construction contract and allows
the individual to hire the lowest bidder.
Public sector contracts involve competitive bidding.
Since the government is a major employer and is political
in nature, there is an assumption that there may be
impropriety and that the government cannot be trusted
to meet and negotiate suitable terms without at least
the appearance of impropriety or special favor. Thus,
competitive bidding serves the dual purpose of safeguarding
against favoritism toward a particular contractor and
giving all a fair opportunity to participate.
Bidding Procedure
In most bidding procedures, there will be a "request
for bids," which is an invitation to construction
companies to make bids on a construction project. (Private
owners and governments typically reserve the right
to reject all bidders, usually for skill or reputation
in trade.) After the request for bids, the bidders
typically will obtain "bidding information,"
which includes the drawings or plans for the project,
job specifications, the parties involved, and the proposed
contract. Upon receiving the bid documents, the bidder
will submit a "bid proposal"; i.e. the offer
(usually irrevocable for a certain stipulated period
of time). Factors considered in accepting a contractor's
bid include: financial ability, reputation, equipment
availability, and skill and expertise. After the lowest
bidder's offer is accepted, the hirer (the owner or
public body) makes a formal award of the contract,
typically through written formal notification. If the
bidder signs the contract, a binding agreement is created.
Bidding Issues
The Illinois Purchasing Act requires competitive bidding
in all public contracts, and all prospective contractors
be "qualified bidders" (using considerations
such as quality and serviceability, terms of delivery,
and site specifications).The Act also requires that
"economical procurement practices" shall
apply to all purchases and contracts by or for any
State Agency. In other words, the state agency may
in good faith determine that it is more economical
to perform the work with its own employees than to
let the contract by competitive bidding. (See Illinois
Section 505/2 et. seq.) Further, Illinois courts have
held that a public body may not draw specifications
in its bid request that would permit only one bidder
to qualify for the project, and that all bidders be
"resident contractors" (i.e. licensed to
transact business in the State of Illinois).
Cases that involve fraud or ill repute in contract bidding
usually nullify the contract. For example, if a city
or county lacks the statutory authority to enter into
a particular contract, the contract is void and the
contractor may not recover for work performed. Cases
that involve bad faith or bribery are also nullified,
with the contractor receiving nothing.
However, accidental bidding discrepancies sometimes
occur. The nature of the bidding process means that
bidders sometimes miscalculate their bids. Relief is
typically granted when the mistake was an honest error
in mathematics or a clerical error but the courts have
refused to grant relief for errors of judgment. The
Illinois courts also have allowed rescission of contracts
when enforcement of the contract would be unconscionable
or when unforeseen circumstances render the contract
unenforceable. In cases of unconscionability, courts
either will grant relief to the bidder, a refund of
the bid deposit, or an action for rescission of the
contract.
When the bidding contract involves a prime contractor
and a subcontractor, a subcontractor generally may
not hold the prime contractor liable for the prime
contractor's use of the subcontractor's bid unless
there was an agreement stating otherwise. Thus, if
a prime contractor uses a subcontractor's bid, the
prime is not compelled to use the subcontractor if
the prime is awarded the project; similarly, a prime
contractor may not hold a subcontractor liable for
the subcontractor's bid unless there was substantial
reliance on this bid by the prime contractor in making
his or her bid, in which case the court may impose
the doctrine of promissory estoppel and hold the subcontractor
liable for its bid. Further, Illinois law requires
that any person or business entity who enters into
a contract for consultant swerves with a State agency
shall state in the contract whether the services of
a subcontractor will be utilized, along with the subcontractors'
names, addresses, and fees charged thereby.
Construction Contract Provisions
Payment Methods
There are three major methods of payment in construction
contracts: lump sum, cost-plus, and unit price. Partial
payments are typically made to the contractor in incremental
sums during the project, with contract clauses usually
providing for a time or condition precedent for payment.
Lump sum payments are found in fixed-price contracts
and provide that upon completion of a contract, the
contractor is paid the amount due. Cost-plus contracts
provide that a contractor will be paid for all costs,
plus a percentage or fixed amount for profit and overhead.
The unit price method is used when the same project
will be completed several times; e.g., a development
project where many houses are being built. A unit price
contract would provide a certain amount of houses and
a certain price per house, and the contractor would
be paid in increments upon the completion of each house.
Once the payment method is determined, the next step
is to calculate the terms and conditions for payment.
A relic of the English legal system under Oliver Cromwell,
performance contracts have typically required performance
of all labor before any payment is requiredabsent an
agreement to the contrary. However, progress payments
are instituted in most construction contracts to provide
relief to ease the contractor's financial burden of
having to finance the entire projectincluding labor,
supplies, and credituntil its full completion. Progress
payments are partial payments for work completed at
a particular stage of the project and ameliorate the
problems of payment collection.
Substantial Performance
In construction projects, performance may be less than
perfect and strict compliance with contractual provisions
may not be literal. In these cases, the Illinois courts
have held that where there is substantial performance,
the contractor is entitled to recover the contract
price, less costs of remedying the minor defect or
omission or reimbursement to the owner for the diminished
value. (In Florida, if the contractors have not substantially
performed their duties, then the contractor, under
a contractual restitution principle, may still recover
for work completed.) Under this theory, the contractor
is paid the value of any benefit conferred upon the
owner by the contractor's performance.
Contractual Clauses
Contractual undertakings require the implementation
of various clauses to protect owner, contractor, and
subcontractor against ambiguities or contractual malfeasance.
Since there are as many "standard" construction
contracts as there are contractors and subcontractors,
generalizations concerning standard contracts can be
perilously misleading. However, the Association of
General Contractors has provided "neutral"
contract provisions that construction contracts should
contain to prevent potential problems.
The Changes Clause
Unexpected delays or scheduling problems can require
last-minute modifications in the work assignments of
subcontractors and should be considered when forming
the contract. Changes clauses are a standard in virtually
every construction contract because they allow modifications
in the design, specifications, and timing of a project
as the desire or need for such modification becomes
apparent during construction. Typically, the owner
may initiate these changes, or must approve changes
which the contractor indicates are necessary. The owner
is then responsible for the additional costs associated
with these changes. This clause allows changes to be
made in the construction of the project without completely
stopping work on the project altogether, and is normally
construed to require prompt performance on the part
of the contractor and subcontractor, with expedited
consideration from the owner because of any dispute
involving the terms of the change.
The Scope of Work Clause
Before work on the project begins, each party should
be clear as to its duties and obligations; i.e., the
work and the costs involved. This is contained in the
Scope of Work Clause, which defines the labor, materials,
services and costs involved in the project. Contractors
should be careful to avoid dragnet or all-inclusive
clauses with boilerplate terms like "all work
necessary to complete said project," "all
related items" and "all work normally undertaken
in this type of trade." Indeed, since the scope
of work is often defined in various documents, each
Scope of Work Clause should be "identified and
incorporated" as such into the general agreement.
Flow-Down and Flow-Up Clauses
Virtually all contracts contain a clause that allows
incorporation of a clause into the general agreement;
in construction contracts, these are typically called
Flow-Down and Flow-Up Clauses (also known as "Conduit
Clauses").
A Flow-Down Clause provides that all duties and obligations
the contractor owes the owner are owed by the subcontractor
as well. Similarly, the Flow-Up Clause ensures the
owner's obligations and duties to the contractor will
also be owed to the subcontractor.
Retention Clauses
Illinois (together with Wisconsin, Texas, and Arkansas)
statutorily requires that certain public owners must
retain ten percent from the contractor's pay. Illinois
Statute (121/5-409 [1993]) requires partial payments
on contracts let by a county for highway work may be
made as the work progresses, but no payment in excess
of 90 % of the value of the work then completed may
be made until 50% of the work has been completed. However,
retention of the 10% may terminate once 50% of the
construction work is completed. Of all states with
a statutorily mandated retention clause, only Illinois
has a statute which requires the retaining of contractor
sums in a pure trust account. (There are, however,
states that require the establishment of an escrow
account.) This trust is put into an Illinois bank of
the contractor's choice, is subject to the approval
of the State agency, and all interest from such trust
is to be paid to the contractor.
Other Standard Clauses
Parties should devote attention to Payment Clauses,
which set forth a schedule of payment that is contingent
on the general contractor getting paid before there
is any payment to the subcontractor. Further, Safety
Clauses are often standard and require subcontractors
to observe basic safety requirements on the job site.
For projects involving many subcontractors, Scheduling
Clauses are often included in each subcontract to ensure
that neither party will incur liability in the event
that a third-party subcontractor's performance is delayed.
Modification of the Contract
Once the contract is executed, it may be modified only
if both parties mutually assent to the modification.
Agreement of both parties is required since the modification
is seen as a new contract, and therefore the contractual
requirements of offer, acceptance and consideration
(typically money or another benefit) apply. Illinois
courts have stated that furnishing additional labor
and construction project materials in exchange for
more money is adequate consideration. Written modifications
are not required unless the Statute of Frauds or the
contract itself necessitates a writing.
Concealed and Changed Conditions
A frequent problem on construction projects is the discovery
of a previously concealed condition that makes the
work more difficult, more expensive, or perhaps impossible
to perform. These discoveries typically result in a
need for additional time, contract revisions, or even
rescission of the contract. Therefore, flexibility
to make changes is an important part of construction
law. In Illinois, the two most common types of clauses
used to deal with concealed or changed conditions are
the Site Investigation Clause, and the Changed Conditions
Clause.
The Site Investigation Clause allows the contractor
to make a claim for any condition not reasonably discoverable
by an investigation of the site. However, the Site
Investigation Clause has proven to be one of the general
contractor's worst enemies. It is often asserted by
the owner as a defense to the contractor's claim for
"extras" since some Illinois courts have
ruled that the contractor "could or should have
anticipated the extra from a reasonable site inspection."
While the Site Investigation Clause is a common construction
contract disclaimer, by far the more common contract
disclaimer is the Changed Conditions Clause.
There are two types of Changed Condition Clauses: the
first addresses the contractor encountering a condition
that is at variance with the conditions already documented
in the agreement, and the second deals with the discovery
of conditions or situations that are anomalous or incongruous
with the type of work provided for in the contract.
In Changed Condition Clauses, custom in the trade is
often the standard for recovery, which is typically
allowed unless the contractor knew or should have known
of the conditions.
Damages in the Event of a Delay
Most construction contracts involve time restraints
and many involve "time is of the essence"
provisions. However, delays in the completion of a
project sometimes happen, and a delay claim for damages
is essentially a claim that the contract has been breached.
However, in contract law, a breach of contract must
be a material breach to file a claim for damages. Tardiness
in completion alone is usually not part of the basic
exchange of values in a construction contract, and
thus not a material breach. Consequently, a construction
contract should specify whether damages are recoverable
if one party fails to perform. The "substantial
factor test" is often applied to subcontractors.
Here, courts will hold subcontractors liable for damages
cause by delayeven though other subcontractors may
contribute tot he delayif the subcontractors conduct
is a substantial factor in the project's delay.
Three kinds of clauses are generally used to ensure
indemnification in the event of a delay: Actual Damages
Clauses, Liquidated Damages Clauses, and No-Damages-For-Delay
Clauses. Actual Damages Clauses provide that a delay
is a breach of the contract, and that the breaching
party must pay money damages equal to the amount of
damages suffered. Liquidated damages set an agreed-upon
amount for damages to be paid in the event of a breach.
No-Damages Clauses contractually limit liability to
provide no relief in the event of a delay.
Construction Default
Mechanic's Liens
A mechanic's lien is a security device by which unpaid
contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers may enforce
payment for services and materials through the lien
process. To acquire a mechanic's lien, a claimant must
fall into one of state-protected classes of lienors,
including: contractors, subcontractors, suppliers,
laborers and mechanics. Mechanic's liens are typically
statutory, so claimants must observe state regulations
in strict obeisance. Substantial performance and proof
of use of the materials into the construction project
are required before the lien will attach. In most states,
evidence that materials were delivered to the site
is sufficient proof that materials were used in the
construction project. However, once a lien is attached
to the property, the courts will liberally interpret
the lien requirements in order to accomplish the parties'
objectives in completion of the project. In the event
that the parties' objectives (presumably, completion
of the project) cannot be met, courts have allowed
the claimant to use the remedy of repossession. Proceedings
for repossession are quite similar to proceedings used
to foreclose a mortgage, and are subject to time constraints
imposed by either the mechanic's lien statute itself,
or by the statute of limitations.
Defenses to mechanic's liens are found in common and
statutory law. An owner may defeat a claim for a mechanic's
lien by proving the lienor's failure to comply with
the statutory requirements (failure to prove that the
materials in dispute were used in the construction
project, for example), or by proving contractual provisions
showing waiver of the lien or lien preclusionprovided
the language of the waiver or preclusion is clear and
unambiguous. Further, if the holder of the lien gave
false, misleading, or inflated price information, any
mechanic's lien will be rendered null and void. Illinois
law provides that the prevailing party in a mechanic's
lien foreclosure will recover reasonable attorney's
fees in an amount to be determined by the court. However,
once the U.S. Supreme Court held that public property
was exempt from mechanic's liens, surety bonds for
construction projects became an established practice
in construction law.
Bond Coverages
Surety bonds date back to Biblical times, and were commonly
used when contracts were generally non-enforceable,
so merchants could protect themselves in commercial
transactions. Furnishing contractor's bonds began in
the late 1800's to provide owners with protection against
contractor's defaults, and laborers and material providers
with protection against nonpayment. Today, the "Miller
Act" (40, United States Cod, section 270) requires
contractors to furnish payment and performance bonds
as a conditions to the award of any substantial public
federal contract. Similarly, all states have "Little
Miller Acts" which require the same bond coverage
for all public state contracts. Owners, concerned with
the threat of mechanic's liens, sought the same kind
of bond protection enjoyed by the public sector. Hence,
the use of private bonds came into general use. Today,
the mechanics lien and the surety bond together furnish
the foundation for the credit structure of one of the
United States' largest industries, the construction
business.
In construction contracts, owners typically will require
the contractor to provide the owner with a private
payment bond. Private payment bonds protect the owner
from mechanic's liens from various subcontractors in
the event of their nonpayment by the contractor. The
bond's surety either will pay to the extent of the
amount specified in the bond (provided the claimant
furnishes the requisite notices to the debtor) or will
effect performance of the work (i.e. the surety guarantees
to the owner faithful performance of the underlying
contract between the owner and the contractor).
Liability to Third Parties
Owners and General Contractors
An owner's or general contractor's liability in construction
projects is dependent on their duty to provide a safe
work environment. For construction work that is inherently
dangerous, owners and general contractors have been
held strictly liable for injuries incurred on-site,
unless special precautions are undertaken by the owner
or general contractor. Illinois has enacted the Structural
Work Act (IL Statutes section 150/1), which was enacted
to provide workers in extra-hazardous occupations a
relatively safe place to work. In order to establish
a cause of action for violation of the Act, the claimant
must show that the injury was one designed to be protected
from by the Act, those in charge of the work willfully
violated the Act, and that violation of the Act proximately
caused plaintiff's injury. Significantly, the party
(owner or general contractor) in charge of the claimant's
work is immune from tort liability under the Structural
Work Act, pursuant to Illinois' worker's compensation
laws, since the supreme court does not consider worker's
compensation benefits to be a collateral source of
recovery.
Lenders
Finance creativity in construction projects has resulted
in lenders becoming more involved in the construction
process, thus expanding the boundaries of lender liability.
Developers who wish to obtain a construction loan typically
need to present a loan commitment to the construction
lender for approval. Upon approval of the loan, the
relevant parties agree that when the construction project
is completed, the permanent lender (the owner's bank)
thereupon will purchase the construction loan from
the construction lender (typically a commercial bank
that specializes in short-term construction loans).
When lenders participate with developers in joint ventures,
courts consistently have found lenders liable to third-party
purchasers for construction defects. A joint venture
typically exists if four elements are found: (1) a
common purpose, (2) joint control or right of control,
(3) joint proprietary interest, and (4) mutual sharing
of profits and losses. If the existence of each element
is proven by the claimant, the lender will be liable
to third-party purchasers for construction defects.
Most courts do not hold lenders liable for negligence
claims on construction projects. Construction lenders
periodically may inspect the site to monitor project
progress, and often extract a fee for doing so. If
an inspection fee is extracted from the construction
loan, this does not give rise to the requisite duty
standard required for a negligence action. However,
if the lender assumes title of the project or becomes
more than a lender by holding itself out to be the
developer or owner to purchasers, the lender will then
be held liable for completion of the project to the
extent of the express representations made to the buyer.
Further, the assuming lender may be liable for construction
defects and breach of any warranties due to these defects.
Architects and Engineers
In large construction projects (and some smaller jobs),
design professionals such as architects or engineers
provide blueprints and plans for more sophisticated
design projects like condominiums, office buildings,
shopping malls, or even homes. Although form agreements
in construction contracts have become customary, ignorance
of their legal significance can be very problematic
for contractors and design professionals alike. If
design professionals fail to perform their duties properly,
they can be held liable for breach of contract, negligence,
failure to disclose a material or latent defect, or
other actions if the court finds their conduct subjects
the architect or engineer to strict liability.
The construction contract lists the duties of the design
professionals, and if these professionals fail to perform
their duties, the owner may sue for breach of contract.
Damages for breach are limited to an amount that is
reasonably foreseeable at the time the contract was
made or to an amount that is a natural consequence
of the breach.
Design professionals acting in their professional capacity
are held to a higher standard of care that is consistent
with their higher degree of knowledge and skill. Therefore,
a design professional whose performance does not meet
the reasonable standard of care of similar professionals
with similar skills will be found liable for negligence.
This negligence standard applies to the professional's
drawings or plans, preparation, inspections, and supervision
of relevant personnel. If it is reasonably foreseeable
that the negligent conduct will result in injury, the
design professional may be liable to third parties
for sustained injuries. However, these third parties
are only owed a duty of care if they are within a class
of persons who the design professional could reasonably
foresee might be damaged or injured as a result of
the negligence. This class of persons includes project
owners, subcontractors, suppliers, contractors, sureties,
lenders, and injured construction workers. However,
negligence claims or tort actions generally do not
allow recovery for solely economic losses. To recover
economic losses in a tort action, the design professional
must be held liable under a standard called strict
liability.
Strict liability is a tort concept in which one is found
liable regardless of fault, contributory negligence,
or anything else that normally absolves persons of
liability. Courts have been very reluctant to impose
strict liability on design professionals as it is usually
impossible to differentiate between a construction
defect and a design defect because they are often closely
intertwined.
However, none of these standards of liability are designed
to assure conformity with the plans or specifications
by the design professional. No construction contract
guarantees or implies perfection in either plans or
results, and design professionalsabsent strict liabilityare
liable only for failure to exercise reasonable skill
in preparation and execution of the plans. Similarly,
contractors are not responsible for defects in the
plans or specifications given to them by design professionals
hired as independent contractors.
Independent Contractors
Design professionals may need to hire consultants from
various disciplines for construction projects. Consultants
such as structural, civil, or mechanical engineers
or electrical experts working on construction projects
at the behest of the architect or engineer (as opposed
to being hired by the owner) are considered independent
contractors. According to the federal courts and Restatement
(Second) of Agency, $220, in determining whether a
consultant is an independent contractor or an employee
the court will consider: the extent of control that
the design professional may exercise over the details
of the work; the terms of the agreement; the method
of payment; the degree of skill required for the job;
previous dealings between the parties; and previous
scopes of employment of the consultant. If the relationship
is determined to be employer/employee, then the tort
doctrine of respondeat superior applies, making the
employer responsible for the torts committed by the
employee (if committed within the scope of employment).
A design professional acting as an independent contractor
is generally not liable for the acts of the independent
contractor, since the duties were delegated to this
contractor in a consultant capacity. However, sometimes
ordinances or building codes will create non-delegable
duties of compliance, such as fire codes regulating
a project's design. In these cases, independent contractors
may be liable for injuries sustained by those within
the class of people intended to be protected by the
ordinance.
Liability Insurance
Construction agreements commonly provide details on
who is responsible for bearing the responsibility for
accidents on the site. Florida Statutory law requires
comprehensive general liability insurance ($489.115)
and workers' compensation insurance ($440 et. seq.).
Builder's risk insurance and professional liability
insurance are standard in most construction contracts.
Most contracts contain indemnity provisions to determine
who will bear the risk of loss should an on-site accident
occur, and the purchaser of the insurance should be
required to furnish a copy of the policy to the other
party.
General Liability
Comprehensive General Liability Insurance protects contractors
against claims brought against them because of occurrences
in privity with the contractor's work, and coverage
typically extends only to property damage and bodily
injury. Business risks such as claims for defective
work or structure defects are covered by other policies;
and builder's risk insurance protects against loss
to buildings during construction, alteration or repair.
(This coverage is usually voided once the work is done
or once the project is occupied.) Professional liability
insurance is carried by professional designers to protect
against losses relating to their work on the project
or to cover claims made against them by third parties.
Owners are increasingly requiring design professionals
to carry liability insurance since owners may have
a claim against the design professional for losses
relating to the project or for satisfaction of claims
to third parties.
Workers' Compensation
Usually a Comprehensive General Liability Insurance
policy excludes coverage for workers' compensation
claims, unemployment compensation, or disability benefits.
This risk insurance is obtained under separate policies,
and in every state, workers' compensation coverage
is required for all employers. General contractors
are often required by the owner to procure workers'
compensation for subcontractors as well as employees.
However, it is customary for general contractors to
fulfill this duty by requiring their subcontractors
to procure the coverage themselves, since worker's
compensation insurance for employees and subcontractors
would be very expensive. If subcontractors do not obtain
this coverage, despite their obligation, the general
contractor bears responsibility to procure this insurance
coverage if the contractor hires the subcontractor.
In contrast, the contractor is generally not obligated
to provide coverage for vendors or lessors of equipment.
Further, if the worker is an independent contractor
instead of a subcontractor, general contractors are
not obligated to provide workers' compensation coverage.
Courts often use a two-pronged test to determine whether
the worker is a subcontractor or an independent contractor:
1) Is there a subletting of the contractor's work?
and 2) Does the contractor have control over the worker?
If an employee files a workers' compensation claim
and wins, then that is the sole recovery for the employee.
However, it is possible under certain conditions that
an independent contractor may file a separate claim
against an employee or subcontractor on the site.
Remedies
In General
Breach of construction contracts entails many things:
the owner's failing to make periodic payments, failure
to cooperate by either party, unforeseen conditions
that render completion impractical or impossible, project
abandonment, or a general failure to fulfill the contractual
obligations. If conditions occur that make performance
by one party impossible, then a party not at fault
may, in good faith, terminate the contract for cause
without fear of damages. However, these terminations
must not be arbitrary or unreasonable or they will
constitute wrongful termination. Wrongful termination
is a breach of contract for which the injured party
may collect compensatory damages, which typically amount
to lost profits and a reasonable calculation of labor
and materials involved in the partial completion of
the project.
Remedies Clauses
Most construction contracts contain either a Time-Is-Of-The-Essence
Clause, a Damages-For-Delay Clause, or a No-Damages-For-Delay
Clause. These clauses typically insulate, protect,
or prevent one of the parties from having to breach
the contract in the event of nonperformances, such
as unforeseen circumstances or impractical occurrences.
More importantly, they provide remedies, or a limitation
of remedies, in the event of a breach. A Time-Is-Of-The-Essence
Clause will provide a fixed time for performance, with
a remedy if completion exceeds this time allotment.
A Damages-For-Delay Clause provides remedies for the
contractor in the event of noncooperation from the
owner, or contingencies that interfere with a timely
performance. No-Damages-For-Delay Clauses protect the
owner from breach assessments in the event of certain
listed occurrences, such as financing problems or construction
access easements. This clause will exclude damages
against the owner for delay of performance.
Resources
Introduction to Construction Law, Steven M. Siegfried,
ALI/ABA Continuing Legal Education, Philadelphia, PA
(1987).
Handbook of Modern Construction Law, Jeremiah D. Lambert
and Lawrence White, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood
Cliffs, NJ (1982).
Alabama
|
Alaska
|
Arizona
|
Arkansas
|
California
|
Colorado
|
Connecticut
|
Delaware
|
District of Columbia
|
Florida
|
Georgia
|
Hawaii
|
Idaho
|
Illinois
|
Indiana
|
Iowa
|
Kansas
|
Kentucky
|
Louisiana
|
Maine
|
Maryland
|
Massachusetts
|
Michigan
|
Minnesota
|
Mississippi
|
Missouri
|
Montana
|
Nebraska
|
Nevada
|
New Hampshire
|
New Jersey
|
New Mexico
|
New York
|
North Carolina
|
North Dakota
|
Ohio
|
Oklahoma
|
Oregon
|
Pennsylvania
|
Rhode Island
|
South Carolina
|
South Dakota
|
Tennessee
|
Texas
|
Utah
|
Vermont
|
Virginia
|
Washington
|
West Virginia
|
Wisconsin
|
Wyoming
|
|