Catfish Contractors Vs NYET County Airport Board

摘要

AACE International is presenting a mock arbitration patterned after an actual arbitration. Actual facts are presented with names and dates changed to protect identities. In this arbitration, you will be presented with case facts and asked to make a final award. The purpose of this exercise is to allow cost and schedule professionals to become familiar with the arbitration process, to understand legal requirements for proving one’s case, and what it takes to be a qualified expert witness in such cases The facts are fairly simple, straightforward and not really in dispute. However, the primary issue revolves around the concept of reasonableness and engineering judgment. NYET County Airport Board hired Catfish Contractors to build a new airport. The project was relatively small and was not complex to estimate, plan, or execute. During construction a dispute arose concerning the caliche (calcified limestone rock) used in the base courses of the runway. NYET believed that compaction and gradation test results showed material not meeting specification was used by Catfish. Catfish believed that while the gradation tests at the site showed a deviation from the tested and approved offsite material source, that it was close enough and that Owner’s engineer should have used its judgment and allow material be left in place. In the alternative, Catfish sought to add lime to the caliche base courses to solve the problem. This solution was rejected by the engineer as being unreliable. This case became a search for justice for the contractor who thought that the owner and its engineers had impugned contractor’s reputation and the engineer was acting arbitrarily and capriciously. The parties, after the contractor was forced to remove the caliche and replace it with material meeting all specifications, formally arbitrated the dispute using American Arbitration Association rules and procedures. Actual results are presented after the mock arbitration is concluded.