首页> 外文期刊>Building >Was Ellis right on Wallis?
【24h】

Was Ellis right on Wallis?

机译:Was Ellis right on Wallis?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Evidence is not admissible when it is irrelevant. Nor is evidence admissible when it is relevant but contains new allegations, and there is not enough time to answer them. In essence, these circumstances arose in the adjudication between Kier Regional, trading as Wallis, and City pound; General (Holborn). This goes on quite a lot. Here are the details. The contract price was pound;11.5m. Wallis' final account was pound;30m. The extension of time was 59 weeks. The prolongation claim was pound;1.4m and the contract administrator awarded pound;500,000. Wallis called for the adjudicator to referee the administrator's pound;500,000 certificate. Charles Ellis was appointed referee and, 28 days later, he said the contract administrator should have awarded pound;1.3m.

著录项

  • 来源
    《Building》 |2006年第8429期|57-0|共1页
  • 作者

    Tony Bingham;

  • 作者单位

    3 Paper Buildings, Temple, London EC4 7EY;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 英语
  • 中图分类 建筑科学;
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2024-01-29 17:11:52
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号