Contracts often include requirements that the works (or their components) achieve a certain design life. Quite what that means can be a vexed question and lead to disputes if one party alleges premature failure. Readers may recall the Supreme Court decision in E.On vs MT Højgaard [2017] UKSC 59, where Højgaard was held to be in breach of the obligation to design the wind turbine foundations to ensure a design life of 20 years, despite this obligation being “tucked away” in the technical requirements.

The issue has recently been considered again in Blackpool Borough Council vs Volkerfitzpatrick Ltd [2020] EWHC 1523. The parties had entered into a contract for the construction of a new tram depot, intended to be a landmark building on the Blackpool seafront. The contract was a modified NEC3 standard form. The works information provided the design life should be 20 years save where specified to the contrary in the functional procurement specification (FPS) (which was also included in the works information). The FPS itself required that the “building structure” should achieve a 50-year design life.

Read more…