Henry Boot Construction Ltd v Alstom Combined Cycles Ltd
Henry Boot Construction Ltd v Alstom Combined Cycles Ltd
- 2000
- Construction Law Journal [2000] 16 Const.L.J. 6, 400-413(14) .
CA 4 April 2000. Boot was the civil engineering contractor for a combined cycle gas turbine power station being built by Alstom. The contract used was the ICE 6th Edition with modifications. The contract price was £250,880 for certain temporary works. It became necessary to value increases under clause 52(1)(b) of the contract. The valuation was carried out with reference to the original valuation of the temporary works. However, the price was based on a mistake in favour of Boot. The arbitrator concluded it was not reasonable to use a price where the price reached was calculated in error, and decided that clause 52(2) should be applied in order to produce a fair valuation. It was concluded that the arbitrator should have based the valuation of the increased values on the price of £250,880, and it was not within the remit of the arbitrator to correct the mistake. Alstom appealed. "Held" appeal by Alstom dismissed.
VARIATIONS
CONTRACT CLAIMS
ENGINEERING CONTRACTS
ICE CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT (SIXTH EDITION)
VALUATION OF VARIATIONS
BILLS OF QUANTITIES
REASONABLENESS
HENRY BOOT CONSTRUCTION V ALSTOM COMBINED CYCLES
CA 4 April 2000. Boot was the civil engineering contractor for a combined cycle gas turbine power station being built by Alstom. The contract used was the ICE 6th Edition with modifications. The contract price was £250,880 for certain temporary works. It became necessary to value increases under clause 52(1)(b) of the contract. The valuation was carried out with reference to the original valuation of the temporary works. However, the price was based on a mistake in favour of Boot. The arbitrator concluded it was not reasonable to use a price where the price reached was calculated in error, and decided that clause 52(2) should be applied in order to produce a fair valuation. It was concluded that the arbitrator should have based the valuation of the increased values on the price of £250,880, and it was not within the remit of the arbitrator to correct the mistake. Alstom appealed. "Held" appeal by Alstom dismissed.
VARIATIONS
CONTRACT CLAIMS
ENGINEERING CONTRACTS
ICE CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT (SIXTH EDITION)
VALUATION OF VARIATIONS
BILLS OF QUANTITIES
REASONABLENESS
HENRY BOOT CONSTRUCTION V ALSTOM COMBINED CYCLES