This case involves a Project Manager who tried to limit his liability on a Construction Project
In summary the dispute was between the Project Manager and the employer over the building of new boarding accomodation the quality of work was not disputed but there were delays.
The Employer claimed that if the Project Manager had acted with care and skill, it would have ensured the Contractor execute the building contract (rather than letters of intent) and that would have produced a more advantageous outcome in the dispute with the Contractor for delay, as the Contractor would have been liable for liquidated damages.
When submitting its fee proposal for this project, the Project Manager attached its standard terms and conditions, including a limitation of liability which had not formed part of the Project Manager’s appointment on two earlier projects at the college. A limitation on liability incorporated into the Project Manager’s retainer, on this third project was found to be unenforceable as it did not meet the requirement of “reasonableness” as set out in the Unfair Contract Terms Act (UCTA) 1977.
Had the limitation been enforceable, the Project Manager’s liability would have been limited to the amount of its fee, which totalled £111,321. The Employer was instead awarded damages of £226,667.
The case has been circulate and written up by Law Now
Well worth a read