Pain/gain share arrangements in target cost contracts
Earlier this year, in the case of AMEC Group Ltd v Secretary of State for Defence  EWHC 110 (TCC), the Technology and Construction Court highlighted the importance of drafting target cost clauses with precision. The court found that the contractor could only recover costs incurred reasonably and properly beyond its cap on liability provided in a maximum price target cost contract.
The secretary of state for defence, as employer, had engaged AMEC Group, as contractor, under a design-and-build contract to provide a nuclear submarine facility on the Clyde.
The project had various issues that led to significant cost increases. Some of the issues encountered did increase the guaranteed maximum price, but many (by value) did not. The parties agreed a pain/gain mechanism, sharing any costs savings and cost overruns up to approximately £140m, after which a further £50m of cost overrun or other liabilities was to be borne by the contractor…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Addleshaw Goddard briefing.
News from Addleshaw Goddard
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Addleshaw Goddard
Data Issues Roundup — new Irish data protection commissioner appointed; Racing Post falls short on IT security; and more
Addleshaw Goddard has released the 15 September 2014 issue of its Data Issues Roundup publication.
The Court of Appeal in has considered the effect of a lease provision requiring a repeat guarantee as a condition of landlord’s consent on intragroup assignment.
Analysis from The Lawyer
Could Slater & Gordon achieve its stated aim of becoming a top consumer brand by acquiring Pannone?
The past five years have not been easy for Addleshaw Goddard. The firm’s revenue fell 7 per cent from £173.1m to £161.9m between 2008/09 and 2010/11 and despite finances looking up in 2011/12, when Addleshaws reported a 30 per cent increase in net profit, it has shown no notable compound growth in turnover since 2007/08.