In the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and economic sanctions imposed by countries around the world in response, supply chain disruptions and the resulting scarcity of construction have resulted in price escalation that threatens construction project budgets. To allocate the risk of these sorts of cost increases, project owners and contractors may use
force majeure
Looking Back — and Ahead — After Two Years of a Pandemic
By Zachary Davis on
In my column for the Daily Journal of Commerce from two years ago, I wrote that proceeding with ongoing or planned construction was not without impact or risk tied to COVID-19, and I provided a checklist for owners, designers and contractors to help them decide whether to continue a project or start a new one…
Pandemic Creates Cause to Rethink Overlooked Contract Provisions
By Zachary Davis on
Posted in Construction Claims, Construction Contracts
The construction industry has proved adaptable over the course of the pandemic — owners and general and trade contractors have worked closely to ensure that work continued, while keeping workers safe and complying with the various government-ordered and -recommended practices intended to slow the spread of COVID-19. By now, most owners and contractors are well…
Freedom to Contract: PUC Has Jurisdiction to Evaluate Force Majeure Clause Under Idaho Law
By Tamara Boeck on
Posted in Public Construction Contracting
The Idaho Supreme Court recently determined in Idaho Power Company v. New Energy Two, LLC, No. 40882-2013 (Idaho June 17, 2014), that the Idaho Public Utilities Commission has jurisdiction to interpret or enforce contracts when given the authority by the parties. In May 2010, IPC and the defendants entered into two energy contracts that were to be completed by a date certain. In advance of the operational dates, the defendants notified IPC of events they claimed were force majeure. Markedly, the defendants’ claim was that the decision-making process of the PUC itself, or the alleged lack thereof, was the force majeure event causing lenders to be “unwilling to lend in Idaho pending the outcome” of the PUC proceedings. IPC filed petitions with the PUC seeking a ruling that there was no force majeure event(s), and that IPC could terminate the contracts. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss that was denied, and the Idaho Supreme Court heard the issue on a permissive appeal.