Did you know that there is a version of The Construction Index for the USA? Visit the site No thanks
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on LinkedIn Follow us on Instagram
Daily construction news
Weekly plant news

Construction News

Sun December 17 2017

Related Information
Related Information
Related Information

News » UK » E.On wins MTH wind farm dispute » published 4 Aug 2017

E.On wins MTH wind farm dispute

The Supreme Court has found in favour of E.On in its long-running dispute with Danish contractor MT Højgaard (MTH).

Robin Rigg wind farm Above: Robin Rigg wind farm

MT Højgaard (MTH) has to foot the bill for the €26.25m repair costs on E.On’s Robin Rigg offshore wind farm in the Solway Firth. 

The foundations of 60 wind turbines installed by MTH failed shortly after completion due to a calculation error in an international design standard contained in the employer’s technical requirements. 

The technical requirements required MTH to (a) comply with the international standard as a minimum (which referred to a 20-year lifespan) and (b) made it clear that it was MTH’s responsibility to identify whether there was a need for a more rigorous requirement.

 The Supreme Court ruled that as a matter of basic principles of contractual interpretation (applying the natural meaning of the words in the contract) (i) MTH should have ensured that the design was satisfactory; (ii) MTH had provided a warranty that the foundations would have a design or service life of 20 years; and (iii) E.On was entitled to rely on that warranty. 

Colette Morgan-Ford, partner at national law firm Weightmans, said after the ruling: “The Supreme Court’s judgment is a stark reminder that the courts are reluctant to interfere in the bargain struck between parties if the words in the contract (taken as a whole) are clear and consistent.  

“Contractors need to ensure that at pre contract stage all documents are read and that the meaning of obligations are clearly understood, including those tucked away in other contract documents. 

“Each case turns on its facts and the specific words in the contract, but, the Supreme Court has now made it clear that a contractor who bids on the basis of a defective specification provided by the employer may only have themselves to blame if they do not check their practicality and they turn out to be defective”

 

 

MPU

Download our free construction news iPhone / iPad app. Sign up to our FREE email newsletters or subscribe to our RSS feed for regular updates on the latest Construction News, Plant News, Contract News & Supplier News. The Construction Index also provides the latest Construction Tenders, Construction Market Data & Construction Law Commentary all FREE.

This article was published on 4 Aug 2017 (last updated on 7 Aug 2017).

More News Channels