Skip to Content (custom)

Equitable Risk Allocation: A Legal Perspective

Publication No
IR210-3
Type
Guidelines/Suggestions
Publication Date
Feb 01, 2007
Pages
62
Research Team
RT-210
DOCUMENT DETAILS
Abstract
Key Findings
Filters & Tags
Abstract

When allocating construction risks, appropriate allocation is often not achieved due to the inferior bargaining position held by lower-tier parties. Beyond this dilemma, the most appropriate and equitable allocation of a particular risk can vary from project to project depending on factors such as the type of risk, work, and contract. As a result, no single, appropriate allocation exists for a given construction risk for all projects. Unfortunately, arriving at a conclusive agreement between contracting parties as to the most appropriate allocation of a given construction risk for a specific project can be a cumbersome, albeit crucial, task.

Due to the problems associated with determining appropriate risk allocation between contracting parties, the Construction Industry Institute (CII) formed the Contracting to Appropriately Allocate Risk Research Team in an effort to encourage risk assessment and allocation in a compromising and educated manner, recognizing the unique circumstances of each specific project. By involving both the owner and the contractor in the risk allocation process, which should begin early in the project life cycle, both parties can avoid the increased costs associated with inappropriate risk allocation. To aid in this process, the research team developed the Two-Party Risk Assessment and Allocation Model, which encourages contracting parties to compromise during the risk allocation process.

This publication is meant to accompany the Two-Party Risk Assessment and Allocation Model by providing useful legal perspective references regarding both contract language and legal research. This book looks at the top 14 risks, identified as the “hot-button” risks, which are listed below in order of the most to the least frequently allocated in an inappropriate manner:

Key Findings
The team also developed a table showing recommended contract language for the 14 “hot button” risks. For each risk, the tables provide examples or descriptions of contract language 1) favoring the buyer, 2) favoring the seller, or  3) compromise. The issues shown at the top of each table should be considered when negotiating clauses pertaining to these risks. The language presented in the contract language tables are recommended, and can be used a starting point or guidance in negotiating the language appropriate to risks considered important by one or both of the parties. (IR210-3, p. 10)
The Research provides legal perspectives and covers legal research on common law interpretations of 10 of the 14 “hot button” risks. For each of the 10 risks addressed by the research, the findings are described, along with a “Legal Issues and Considerations” flow chart. The flow charts are especially instructive on how courts may assign responsibility between owner and contractor. RR210-11 covers the legal perspectives in more details and includes detailed descriptions of relevant court decisions relating to the 10 risks.

IR210-3, Equitable Risk Allocation: A Legal Perspective

This is a companion publication to IR210-2, and should be used in conjunction with IR210-2. Significant contents include listing of “hot button risks” (risks most frequently allocated inaprropriately), list of general risk allocation principles and legal risk allocation principles, and a contract language table for each of the “hot button risks.” IR210-3 also includes a legal issues and considerations flow chart for each risk. These charts help minimize the confusion and ambiguities surrounding the allocation of each risk.

Filters & Tags
Research Topic
Contracting to Appropriately Allocate Risk
Keywords
Risk Allocartion, Risk Assessment, Risk Analysis, Legal Principles, Hot Button Risks, Legal Perspectives, Two Party Risk Assessment, Indemnity, Insurance, Consequential Damages, No Damages for Delay, Contract Language, rt210