What is striking about this case, is that it is not difficult to see how things might have turned out differently - and much more expensively - for the employer. The parties and the judge had to interpret the meaning of interacting contractual clauses and technical requirements, which had as much scope to be in conflict with each other as to co-exist. It is not hard to see how the need for clarity can sometimes become obscured by the complexity of the project, the documents and the technical requirements themselves. This case is a timely reminder to be satisfied that the final documents are unified in expressing the clear intent of the parties.
展开▼
