Trade practices and customs may not prevail

Even when care is taken to be precise when drafting a contract's scope of work, issues may still arise regarding the exact requirements conveyed by the contract's drawings and specifications. Courts are often asked to examine a contract's language in order to determine its proper mean...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Civil engineering (New York, N.Y. 1983) Vol. 72; no. 4; p. 104
Main Authors:	Loulakis, Michael C, Santiago, Simon J
Format:	Magazine Article
Language:	English
Published:	New York American Society of Civil Engineers 01-04-2002
Subjects:	Cold Compliance Construction contracts Contract law Court decisions Language United States > US
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	Even when care is taken to be precise when drafting a contract's scope of work, issues may still arise regarding the exact requirements conveyed by the contract's drawings and specifications. Courts are often asked to examine a contract's language in order to determine its proper meaning. However, a contract may also require performance that varies from industry standards, and the parties are free to negotiate a level of performance that is higher or lower than the standard normally expected in the industry. Courts have held that evidence of trade practice and custom cannot trump language that clearly and unambiguously imposes requirements that are different from industry standards. The case Jowett Inc. vs. United States illustrates this point.
ISSN:	0885-7024 2381-0688