All posts tagged Offshore Construction Law and Practice

Notes 1 The Contractor may not wish to part with possession until its claim for price adjustments are satisfied and the Company has waived any claim for payment of liquidated damages, whereas the Company may wish to terminate and take over possession if the work is not completed to its . . . Read more

!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd”[]> CHAPTER 9 Intellectual property rights Rob Facob, Eifion Morris       A Introduction 9.1 Intellectual property rights are often overlooked in offshore construction contracts with most parties believing that they are simply ‘somebody else’s problem’. However, get intellectual property wrong and it . . . Read more

Notes 1 See ch 3. 2 We consider the correct application of such clauses in ch 2 at paras 2.85–94. If the contract does not contain such a clause, a similar approach would apply as a matter of the principles of contract interpretation, to the extent that the inconsistency cannot . . . Read more

Notes 1 Shipbuilders’ Association of Japan. 2 Robinson v Harman (1848) 1 Exch 850. 3 Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 156 ER 145, (1854) 9 Exch 341. 4 Stocznia Gdynia SA v Gearbulk Holdings Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 75. 5 Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre v New Garage and Motor Co [1915] AC . . . Read more

Notes 1 As with the FEED package, pre-FEED studies and investigations can vary in detail and scope depending on the driving force of the project. They supply the background research for the project and often include conceptual investigations to determine the main elements of the functional specification, the feasibility of . . . Read more

Notes 1 See ch 3, para 3.4 for discussion of the functional specification. 2 Tender bid as offer: Spencer v Harding (1870) LR 5 CP 561; Blackpool and Fylde Aero Club Ltd v Blackpool Borough Council [1990] 1 WLR 1195, [1990] 3 All ER 25. Offer can be withdrawn at . . . Read more

Notes 1 Section 313. 2 Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd v Papadopoulos and Ors [1980] 1 WLR 1129, [1980] 2 All ER 29, [1980] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 1. 3 JCT: Joint Contracts Tribunal; FIDIC: International Federation of Consulting Engineers; ICE: Institution of Civil Engineers. 4 The interpretation of contracts is . . . Read more

Notes 1 In the context of an attempt to avoid an order for contempt of court, the Privy Council in Isaacs v Robertson [1985] AC 97 noted that judges have ‘cautiously refrained from seeking to lay down a comprehensive definition of defects’ that would allow a court order to be . . . Read more

Notes 1 The Company cannot request extra work and changes without express authority: Dodd v Churton [1897] 1 QB 562, (1897) 13 TLR 305. 2 H G Beale, Chitty on Contracts (32nd edn, Sweet & Maxwell 2015) paras 22–032 to 22–039. 3 For the legal test for when a term . . . Read more

Notes 1 [1945] 1 All ER 247. 2 See discussion in Robert Clay, Nicholas Dennys (eds), Hudson’s Building and Engineering Contracts (13th edn, Sweet & Maxwell 2015) para 9–050 ff. 3 (1880) 5 QBD 149. 4 (1991) 28 Con LR 109. 5 See Section B above on ‘Nature of work . . . Read more