2019 MTECCNEWS CASENOTES
An adjudicator determined that Cockram, as subcontractor to Fulton Hogan, was entitled to be paid $8,307,337.72 in respect of extensions of time. In defence of the claim, Fulton Hogan relied upon clause 22(1)(e) of the subcontract, which provided as a pre-condition to entitlement to an extension of time, that the contractor (Fulton Hogan) had received an equivalent extension of time under the head contract. The adjudicator held that this was not “a legitimate condition precedent” because it relied upon a contractual relationship to which Cockram was not a party.
2019 MTECCNEWS CASENOTES Download