The British Architect; A Journal of Architecture and the Accessory Arts Volume 25 (Paperback)


This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1886 edition. Excerpt: ...sure there are hundreds of a similar nature being entered into during the course of the year. A property owner wanted a house painted, and received an estimate and specification from a painter; the acceptance of same constituted the contract. There was no mention of payment on account as the work proceeded, or any other usual conditions, save and except that the work should be completed in a workmanlike manner and to the employer's satisfaction, which I would have done if an architect had prepared the contract, giving the usual 75 per cent, of the value of the work executed, and other necessary equitable clauses. The painter proceeds with the job, and ultimately sends in his account, on receipt of which the owner visits the premises, and points out that the work is incomplete. A dispute arises, and a solicitor is retained, who issues a writ for the full amount. The owner instructs another to defend the action. Subsequently, by consent of both parties, all matters in dispute (including costs) are referred to an architect and to abide by his award. The arbitrator takes down sworn evidence of witnesses of both sides, and visits the locus in quo and finds out that the work has not been completed as per specification. Well, what is he to do? He certainly should not award a sum for the work actually done, deducting so much for the work not finished, however desirous he may be that the plaintiff be paid for what he has actually done, because he is ex curia and has no right to sue (thereby incurring heavy law costs) until he completed his entire contract, unless it could be shown to be the fault of the employer that it was so. This principle is clearly laid down by "Chitty on Contracts, 1S68 " (an undoubted authority), in the case of...

R518

Or split into 4x interest-free payments of 25% on orders over R50
Learn more

Discovery Miles5180
Free Delivery
Delivery AdviceOut of stock

Toggle WishListAdd to wish list
Review this Item

Product Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1886 edition. Excerpt: ...sure there are hundreds of a similar nature being entered into during the course of the year. A property owner wanted a house painted, and received an estimate and specification from a painter; the acceptance of same constituted the contract. There was no mention of payment on account as the work proceeded, or any other usual conditions, save and except that the work should be completed in a workmanlike manner and to the employer's satisfaction, which I would have done if an architect had prepared the contract, giving the usual 75 per cent, of the value of the work executed, and other necessary equitable clauses. The painter proceeds with the job, and ultimately sends in his account, on receipt of which the owner visits the premises, and points out that the work is incomplete. A dispute arises, and a solicitor is retained, who issues a writ for the full amount. The owner instructs another to defend the action. Subsequently, by consent of both parties, all matters in dispute (including costs) are referred to an architect and to abide by his award. The arbitrator takes down sworn evidence of witnesses of both sides, and visits the locus in quo and finds out that the work has not been completed as per specification. Well, what is he to do? He certainly should not award a sum for the work actually done, deducting so much for the work not finished, however desirous he may be that the plaintiff be paid for what he has actually done, because he is ex curia and has no right to sue (thereby incurring heavy law costs) until he completed his entire contract, unless it could be shown to be the fault of the employer that it was so. This principle is clearly laid down by "Chitty on Contracts, 1S68 " (an undoubted authority), in the case of...

Customer Reviews

No reviews or ratings yet - be the first to create one!

Product Details

General

Imprint

Rarebooksclub.com

Country of origin

United States

Release date

September 2013

Availability

Supplier out of stock. If you add this item to your wish list we will let you know when it becomes available.

First published

September 2013

Authors

Dimensions

246 x 189 x 23mm (L x W x T)

Format

Paperback - Trade

Pages

454

ISBN-13

978-1-230-03349-5

Barcode

9781230033495

Categories

LSN

1-230-03349-1



Trending On Loot