I promise that any disputes between us will be argued at your house. Time passes and a dispute begins to brew. Now, I want to argue at my house, not at yours. You pay costs to argue at my house that you wouldn’t have incurred had I done as agreed. Should I have to reimburse your costs?
A Federal Court in Northern California said yes – I have to pay your costs because I broke my promise.
During a project for the U.S. Navy in Djibouti for electrical and mechanical power-plant upgrades, a Subcontractor agreed that any disputes between it and the Prime Contractor would be resolved in a California Federal Court. The Prime is a U.S. company with its headquarters in California. The Sub is a Lebanese company with no regular presence in the U.S. In fact, it appears the Sub has never been to the U.S.
Recap: The dispute has nothing to do with anything near your headquarters/office/house, the Project is nowhere near your office, I’ve never been near your office, it’s probably more convenient for you to argue near your office, which is why you included this term in the Subcontract, and (most importantly) I agreed to only argue near your office.
Result: The argument will be near your office, not mine and not near the Project where we both worked and lived for many months. And, I now have pay your costs incurred because I tried to argue with you near the Project.
Roads & Bridges | All According to Plan
ALL ACCORDING TO PLAN | Exact Measurements Go a Long Way
In December 2013, a contractor agreed to replace four bridges for the […]
Roads & Bridges | Connecting the Dots
CONNECTING THE DOTS | Showing Causation in Contracting Cases is Critical
In this asphalt case, the prime contractor agreed to perform a $13 […]
Roads & Bridges | Liquidated Damages
LIQUIDATED DAMAGES | Penalties and What is Unenforceable
Liquidated damages typically flow from delays, but they are not always solidly enforced.
In June 2017, […]
Roads& Bridges | Warranty Provisions
WARRANTY PROVISIONS | Contracts must be interpreted thoroughly to avoid absurd results
You are responsible for things within your control. Be careful if […]
Roads& Bridges | The Agreed Price
THE AGREED PRICE | This case stands as a warning about pay-if-paid clause
History cannot be rewritten and a bad, but legal, […]
Roads& Bridges | Confusing Waters
CONFUSING WATERS | A Supreme Court ruling leaves room for ambiguity
What happens when there may be a “significant nexus” between “adjacent” and/or […]
Roads & Bridges | Authority Defined
AUTHORITY DEFINED | The Law of Agency is Important to Understand
For any project, this Russian proverb is helpful: Doveryay, no proveryay – […]
Jurisdiction is Power
Not bad power, but the ability of a decision-maker (e.g., court) to decide which side is right (or which is more correct). […]
Roads & Bridges | Defining Labor
DEFINING LABOR | How the Miller Act continues to shape the industry
In the late 1700s, risks of nonpayment caused a shortage of […]
Jonathan J. Straw
Blog Author
Contact Jonathan
Partner | KraftsonCaudle.com
Download Jon’s Bio
