Don't leave it to a judge to define your responsibility
Series: Construction News ; (6726) 26 July 2001, 25(1)Publication details: 2001Subject(s):- TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT
- OBLIGATIONS
- PROJECT MANAGERS
- CLIENTS
- NEGLIGENCE
- LIABILITIES
- PRIDE VALLEY FOODS V HALL & PARTNERS
- POZZOLANIC LYTAG LTD V BRYAN HOBSON ASSOCIATES
- CHESHAM PROPERTIES LTD V BUCKNALL AUSTIN PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES LTD
- COPTHORNE HOTEL (NEWCASTLE) LTD V ARUP ASSOCIATES
- Project management
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS64300 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 113973-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
With reference to case law explains how project managers must define as clearly as possible, in their terms of engagement, precisely what their obligations to their clients are. Discusses cases "Pride Valley Foods v Hall & Partners"; "Pozzolanic Lytag v Bryan Hobson Associates"(1999); "Chesham Properties Ltd v Bucknall Austin Project Management Services Ltd"(1996) and "Copthorne Hotel (Newcastle) v Arup Associates"(1999).