Construction Contracts: No Implied Obligation To 'Get On With It'

An issue that regularly crops-up in practice, but rarely before the courts, is whether a contractor is subject to an obligation to progress its works in a "regular and diligent" or similar manner, and if so what this actually means. In a judgment handed down yesterday, the TCC decided that a subcontractor was not under any implied obligation to proceed with its works "regularly and diligently". The same is likely to be true for main contractors and others involved in construction projects.

The Facts

The case concerned a groundworks subcontract. The main contractor initially claimed that the subcontractor was obliged to perform its works in accordance with an Activity Schedule that set out activities and by when they were to be completed. The subcontractor, it was claimed, was late in the performance of its works as against the Activity Schedule, and the main contractor alleged that it suffered a loss due to the subcontractor's delay. The main contractor sought to withhold damages for delay from amounts otherwise due to the subcontractor.

Later on, and before the TCC, the main contractor accepted that the Activity Schedule was not binding on the subcontractor. Nevertheless, it maintained...