Webinar - Contractor Obligations under JCT D&B Contract - Design and Quality Standards

This topic is for all questions raised on our webinar "Contractor Obligations under JCT D&B Contract - Design and Quality Standards”. If you haven’t already attended it, you can sign up here:- Webinar - Contractor Obligations under JCT D&B Contract - Design and Q | Built Intelligence

What’s it about?

The aim of this course is to outline the key obligations of the Contractor under a JCT Design and Build Contract, focussing on the design and also quality and standards aspects.

You will learn

By the end of this webinar you will be able to:

  • Define and explain the key obligations placed on the Contractor under DB16,
  • Identify the quality and standards requirements laid out in the DB16 and relevant case law, and
  • Understand the design obligations of the contractor and the relevant case law.
1 Like

I worked on a project where the contractor had uncovered some unidentified services (not available on any existing drawings). The contractor believes this is an inadequacy within the employers requirements and believes this is notifiable as a change under clause 2.12.2 of the D&B contract. Can you define inadequacy in this case? Would the employer be liable to accepting any additional cost and delay to programme?

1 Like

https://www.isurv.com/directory_record/3981/crown_estate_commissioners_v_john_mowlem_and_co_ltd

1 Like

under Clause 2.17.3 the Contract wording includes the phrase “loss of use and other consequential loss”. In refurbishing one floor of a multi-storey hospital loss of use of adjacent departments is reasonably foreseeable and a large risk to the Trust. The Contractor wants to limit the liability under 2.17.3 - is it worth amending the clause that loss of use isn’t limited but other consequential losses would be limited?

Great question Joe - any thoughts @stevencevans

1 Like

Generally under JCT DB the contractor is liable for anything in the ground.

2 Likes

Discussion has revolved around ‘a’ named subcontractor; could the Emp not include names of 2 or 3 preferred subcontractors in the E R? @stevencevans

1 Like