Make intentions clear (Record no. 118468)
[ view plain ]
| 000 -LEADER | |
|---|---|
| fixed length control field | 01746cam a2200241 4500 |
| 001 - CONTROL NUMBER | |
| control field | ABS68494 |
| 008 - FIXED-LENGTH DATA ELEMENTS--GENERAL INFORMATION | |
| fixed length control field | 041220n2004 000 0 eng u |
| 035 ## - SYSTEM CONTROL NUMBER | |
| System control number | (Sirsi) u128357 |
| 100 ## - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME | |
| Personal name | Atkinson, D. |
| 245 ## - TITLE STATEMENT | |
| Title | Make intentions clear |
| 260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC. | |
| Date of publication, distribution, etc. | 2004 |
| 490 ## - SERIES STATEMENT | |
| Series statement | Construction News |
| Volume/sequential designation | (6897) 16 December 2004, 25(1) |
| 520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC. | |
| Summary, etc. | Discusses how letters of intent can leave contractors out of pocket on complex jobs. Suggests it is always best to make time to write a contract and clearly state costs. Looks at "Mowlem plc v Stena Line Ports Ltd" ([2004] EWHC 2206 (TCC) unreported), where the judge ruled a letter of intent was not limited to work before that date and that it was bizarre if the limit could be avoided by simply exceeding it. Points out that a letter of intent usually states the employers intention to contract with the contractor and promises that if a contract is not concluded, the employer will pay the contractor's costs up to a given limit. If a contractor then continues to work after the cost limit has been reached, it is not automatically entitled to payment for this extra work. Recommends that if the contractor thinks that the cost limit imposed for the work is too low for the work carried out, it should stop work. Suggests the parties always try to conclude a contract and if they cannot, they should make sure both parties know what will signal the end of the contractor's obligations under the letter of intent. |
| 590 ## - LOCAL NOTE (RLIN) | |
| Local note | ABS |
| 590 ## - LOCAL NOTE (RLIN) | |
| Local note | ABS |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | LETTERS OF INTENT |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | MOWLEM PLC v STENA LINE PORTS LTD |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | IMPLIED TERMS |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | ESTOPPEL |
| 650 ## - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM | |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element | BUILDING CONTRACTORS |
| 690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN) | |
| Topical term or geographic name as entry element | BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION-CONTRACTS-CASE LAW |
| 942 ## - ADDED ENTRY ELEMENTS (KOHA) | |
| Suppress in OPAC | 0 |
| Withdrawn status | Lost status | Source of classification or shelving scheme | Damaged status | Not for loan | Home library | Current library | Shelving location | Date acquired | Total Checkouts | Full call number | Barcode | Date last seen | Copy number | Price effective from | Koha item type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dewey Decimal Classification | London | London | Journal article | 20/12/2004 | ABS68494 | 128357-1001 | 06/08/2019 | 1 | 06/08/2019 | Journal article |