Jara Drapala & Partners has obtained a judgement on behalf of Porr S.A. awarding it over PLN 11 million against Poland's General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways for performance of works exceeding the contract scope.
JD&P describes Porr S.A. as "one of the leading contractors of roads and bridges." According to the firm, "the dispute regarded the construction of one of the expressways executed on the 'construct' basis .... Based on the evidence submitted by the contractor’s representatives the Regional Court in Warsaw declared that the description of the scope of the works to be performed was incomprehensible and unclear, the technical specifications contained contradictory data, and the design documentation provided by the investor did not contain all necessary elements. The obligation to discover such defects and contradictions does not lie with the contractor. The Court agreed with the arguments of the JD&P lawyers and declared that ... a portion of the performed work ... exceeded the contractor’s contractual obligation and hence the claim for reimbursement of the cost of these works was to be allowed."
In JD&P's opinion, "this judgement may substantially influence the court practice in regard to pursuing by contractors claims for reimbursement of costs of additional works incurred due to faults, defects and internal contradictions in the design documentation and specifications (in particular contracts based on a lump sum) as well as the method for calculating the amount of such claims."
The judgement is not final.
The JD&P team was led by Partner Przemyslaw Drapala and included Partner Andrzej Sokolowski and Legal Advisor Filip Rasala.
Editor's Note: On October 6, 2017, CEE Legal Matters was informed by Jara Drapala & Partners that Porr S.A. had reached an agreement with the General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways under which Porr was paid PLN 12 million. According to JD&P, "as part of the settlement, a number of claims of the general contractor have been settled, including claims for remuneration for substitute works, costs incurred within the extended Completion Period, overall costs of the construction office, costs of adjustment to general requirements, as well as damages .... Thanks to the success in court of first instance and further involvement of JD&P, the contractor received the payments it was entitled to without the need to conduct further proceedings."
