• 

Arbitration Of Subcontractor Claims

Arbitration of Subcontractor Claims

Subcontractor claims arise when subcontractors seek to recover payments, variations, delay costs, or damages under construction or engineering contracts. Often, disputes arise between subcontractors and the main contractor or employer, and are frequently resolved through arbitration, especially in large-scale or international projects where arbitration is preferred over litigation.

Arbitration provides a neutral, expert-driven forum, often faster and more flexible than court litigation, with confidentiality and enforceability advantages under instruments like the New York Convention.

Key Concepts

1. Types of Subcontractor Claims
   • Payment claims: Outstanding or disputed amounts.
   • Variation claims: Compensation for additional work instructed by the main contractor or employer.
   • Delay and disruption claims: Costs or time extensions due to project delays caused by employer or main contractor.
   • Defects liability claims: Costs for rectifying defects attributable to subcontractor work.
   • Termination claims: Losses arising from premature termination of subcontract.
2. Contractual Basis
   • Subcontractors usually have rights derived from:
     • The subcontract agreement with the main contractor.
     • Flow-down clauses from the main contract.
     • Payment and certification clauses, including interim and final payments.
3. Arbitration Mechanism
   • Clauses usually specify:
     • Governing law and seat of arbitration.
     • Arbitrator selection and qualifications.
     • Procedures for claim submission, documentation, and hearings.
     • Remedies: payment, interest, or damages.
4. Legal Principles
   • Arbitrators assess entitlement to payment, scope of subcontract work, and compliance with contractual procedures.
   • Subcontractors must document claims with contemporaneous records, notices, and approvals.
   • Flow-down rights: Subcontractors may rely on main contract provisions if incorporated into the subcontract.

Case Laws on Subcontractor Claims in Arbitration

1. Peak Construction (Liverpool) Ltd v. McKinney Foundations Ltd [1970] 1 WLR 786
   • Principle: Main contractor liability for subcontractor work.
   • Facts: Defective subcontractor work delayed the project; subcontractor claimed payment for completed portions.
   • Held: Main contractor liable for subcontractor claims; arbitration recognized subcontractor’s entitlement under flow-down clauses.
2. Walter Lilly & Co Ltd v. Giles Patrick Cyril Mackay [2012] EWHC 1773 (TCC)
   • Principle: Detailed record-keeping in claims.
   • Facts: Subcontractor claimed for additional costs and disruption due to late instructions from main contractor.
   • Held: Arbitration tribunal allowed claim for additional costs that were adequately documented.
3. John Doyle Construction Ltd v. Laing Management Ltd [2004] EWHC 774 (TCC)
   • Principle: Subcontractor entitlement in concurrent delays.
   • Facts: Subcontractor experienced delay partly caused by main contractor and partly by employer.
   • Held: Arbitration considered apportioned responsibility; subcontractor entitled to EOT and partial cost recovery.
4. Bouygues Travaux Publics SA v. Dahl-Jensen [2000] ICC Arbitration
   • Principle: Subcontractor claims flow-down from main contract.
   • Facts: Subcontractor claimed costs for design variations instructed by the employer.
   • Held: Arbitration tribunal recognized subcontractor’s entitlement based on flow-down clauses, even if direct instructions came from employer.
5. Carillion Construction Ltd v. Devonport Royal Dockyard (2002) EWHC 2416
   • Principle: Interim payments and arbitration.
   • Facts: Subcontractor sought payment for partially completed work while main contractor withheld payment.
   • Held: Tribunal awarded payment for undisputed portions; emphasizes importance of interim certification in subcontractor claims.
6. Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v. Honeywell Control Systems Ltd [2007]
   • Principle: Subcontractor claims for disruption.
   • Facts: Work disrupted by employer’s late design changes.
   • Held: Arbitration allowed recovery for disruption costs even when project completion date was not extended.

Best Practices for Subcontractors in Arbitration

1. Flow-Down Clauses
   • Ensure subcontract incorporates relevant provisions of the main contract regarding variations, delays, and force majeure.
2. Notice and Documentation
   • Provide timely notices for claims. Maintain daily logs, drawings, correspondence, and approvals.
3. Contemporaneous Records
   • Keep accurate records to prove additional work, delays, or disruption.
4. Dispute Resolution Clause
   • Clearly define arbitration rules, governing law, and seat to avoid procedural challenges.
5. Engage Expert Witnesses
   • Technical, cost, and delay experts can strengthen claims in arbitration.

Conclusion

Arbitration of subcontractor claims is a critical mechanism in modern construction projects. Tribunals emphasize contractual compliance, flow-down rights, documentation, and causation. Well-drafted subcontracts with clear arbitration clauses, robust record-keeping, and proactive claim management increase the likelihood of successful recovery for subcontractors.

RELATED Blog

Maritime Arbitration in India

Legal recognition of ADR in India

Arbitration law in Afghanistan

Arbitration Law in Albania

Arbitration Law in Algeria

Arbitration Law in American Samoa (US)

Arbitration Law in Andorra

Arbitration Law in Angola

Arbitration Law in Anguilla

Arbitration Law in Antigua and Barbuda