Global supply-chain delays and shortages have had an impact on construction contracts in terms of enforceability and risk, and have increased the likelihood of litigation to settle differences between parties, as well as the need to negotiate contracts that anticipate and minimize potential disputes.
“The allocation of risk is paramount to [achieving] the best possible outcome,” stated David Vanderhider, a Partner in the San Antonio office of Dykema Gossett, a Detroit-based national law firm with a substantial construction litigation practice.
During an October 26 webinar that explored the legal considerations of supply-chain impacts on contracts, Vanderhider was joined by two Partners from Dykema Gossett’s Chicago office: Steven Mroczkowski, who is Co-leader of the firm’s Construction Group; and Melanie Chico, Asset Practice Group Leader.
Chico predicted that supply-chain problems, including those related to costs and labor, are likely to spill into 2023. To which Vanderhider followed that earlier attention to planning will be needed to prepare for delays and cost overruns. Mroczkowksi added that collaboration is the key to allocating risk fairly, and he’s been seeing fewer take-it-or-leave-it clauses on contracts. But he also noted that “there’s no one-size-fits-all” solution.
Contractual risk and reward
The bulk of the webinar was taken up with the partners discussing different contract clauses. For example, Mroczkowski has seen an uptick in litigation over the applicability of force majeure, which is intended to excuse nonperformance following a particular event. (This is commonly known as the “Act of God” provision.) Such clauses are enforceable when the event is beyond the reasonable control of the party. And what is often being litigated, he said, is whether the affected party took sufficient steps to reduce its risk.
Mroczkowski cautioned that force majeure can vary by jurisdiction and how a project’s financing is structured, which is why he advises clients to customize the language of their contracts to the realities of the given project. “Sometimes, risk allocation boils down to an amendment in a contract,” observed Chico.
Another growing area of dispute, the partners said, is a contract’s Notice requirement, which spells out when a party is entitled to additional compensation or time. Chico said that too many notice clauses are loosely drawn up, and lack specificity when it comes to who, what, when, and why.
Indeed, the partners agreed that the precision of a particular clause’s language usually determines each party’s level of protection in a contract, especially at a time when outside forces that affect contractual agreements are in flux.
Litigate or arbitrate
![Contracts are still being written too loosely](/sites/default/files/inline-images/construction_contract_agreement_template1_1.jpg)
During the webinar, the partners touched on suspension and termination provisions, limitation of liability clauses, waivers for consequential damages (which owners are generally interested in), safety requirements, and insurance requirements. (Vanderhider said that insurance policies covering errors and omissions/professional liability “are trending,” and revolve around notice provisions.)
He said he’s been seeing contracts with more provisions that allow owners to withhold payments, with a notorious change in emphasis from “pay when paid” to “pay if paid,” which shifts more risk onto subcontractors. Chico added there are options “to be creative here,” such as payment clauses that kick in or are capped at certain thresholds, are limited to certain building materials, are tied to index pricing, or offer early payment for supply and storage actions.
The partners also took some time to debate how best to resolve disputes in general.
Vanderhider typically favors litigation, claiming that arbitration doesn’t always save time or money, and can place limits on the presentation of evidence and witnesses. “Many of the more common contract forms don’t reflect the reality of today’s economic climate,” he asserted. But Vanderhider also conceded that arbitration makes it easier for parties to keep evidence private
Chico, on the other hand, prefers arbitration, “mostly because it’s faster” than letting a lawsuit play out. She and Vanderhider agreed that dispute clauses in contracts are most effective when they are consistent throughout the construction chain. Mroczkowski recommended, too, that contracts include a provision mandating some level of arbitration so as not to halt the project while the parties try to resolve differences.
In conclusion, Mroczkowski cited four takeaways for contractual risk mitigation:
•Focus on your priorities
•Be proactive anticipating supply-chain impacts
•Ensure consistency in certain key contract terms
•Ensure compliance with local laws.
Related Stories
| Sep 26, 2016
RELIGIOUS FACILITY GIANTS: A ranking of the nation’s top religious sector design and construction firms
Gensler, Leo A Daly, Brasfield & Gorrie, Layton Construction, and AECOM top Building Design+Construction’s annual ranking of the nation’s largest religious facility AEC firms, as reported in the 2016 Giants 300 Report.
| Sep 16, 2016
U.S. construction companies not embracing technology: KPMG survey
U.S. construction companies are not embracing technological advancements, such as drone aircrafts, robotics, RFID equipment and materials tracking, and data analytics, according to KPMG International’s Global Construction Survey 2016, “Building a technology advantage.
Architects | Sep 15, 2016
Implicit bias: How the unconscious mind drives business decisions
Companies are tapping into the latest research in psychology and sociology to advance their diversity and inclusion efforts when it comes to hiring, promoting, compensation, and high-performance teaming, writes BD+C's David Barista.
AEC Tech | Sep 6, 2016
Innovation intervention: How AEC firms are driving growth through R&D programs
AEC firms are taking a page from the tech industry, by infusing a deep commitment to innovation and disruption into their cultural DNA.
Sponsored | Contractors | Sep 5, 2016
Rental vs. purchase: How to minimize job site costs
Smart business decisions can mean the difference between being ‘on budget’ and going ‘way over’ budget.
| Sep 1, 2016
TRANSIT GIANTS: A ranking of the nation's top transit sector design and construction firms
Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, Perkins+Will, Skanska USA, Webcor Builders, Jacobs, and STV top Building Design+Construction’s annual ranking of the nation’s largest transit sector AEC firms, as reported in the 2016 Giants 300 Report.
| Sep 1, 2016
INDUSTRIAL GIANTS: A ranking of the nation's top industrial design and construction firms
Stantec, BRPH, Fluor Corp., Walbridge, Jacobs, and AECOM top Building Design+Construction’s annual ranking of the nation’s largest industrial sector AEC firms, as reported in the 2016 Giants 300 Report.
| Sep 1, 2016
HOTEL SECTOR GIANTS: A ranking of the nation's top hotel sector design and construction firms
Gensler, HKS, Turner Construction Co., The Whiting-Turner Contracting Co., Jacobs, and JBA Consulting Engineers top Building Design+Construction’s annual ranking of the nation’s largest hotel sector AEC firms, as reported in the 2016 Giants 300 Report.
| Sep 1, 2016
CULTURAL SECTOR GIANTS: A ranking of the nation's top cultural sector design and construction firms
Gensler, Perkins+Will, PCL Construction Enterprises, Turner Construction Co., AECOM, and WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff top Building Design+Construction’s annual ranking of the nation’s largest cultural sector AEC firms, as reported in the 2016 Giants 300 Report.
| Sep 1, 2016
COURTHOUSE GIANTS: A ranking of the nation's top courthouse design and construction firms
DLR Group, NBBJ, Hensel Phelps, Sundt Construction, AECOM, and Dewberry top Building Design+Construction’s annual ranking of the nation’s largest courthouse sector AEC firms, as reported in the 2016 Giants 300 Report.