Another dispute between the contractor and the General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways over the settlement of the agreement on the performance of the Programme Concept

Another contractor has turned to the Law Firm for legal support in claims related to the performance of a contract for the General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways (GDDKiA), the subject of which remained the preparation of documentation necessary to determine geological and engineering conditions in the area intended for the construction of an expressway.

The subject of analysis by the attorneys and legal advisors of the Law Firm again remained claims arising from a dispute as to the method of accounting for exploratory boreholes drilled in the ground and in rock (as part of a single exploratory borehole).

As in other cases in which the Law Firm has successfully provided legal assistance to contractors operating in the geological sector, which we have reported in previous posts that you can read here i here, also in the recently analysed case, the GDDKiA’s position was that in the case where both soil and rock were present within a single test hole, it remained reasonable to divide the test hole into shorter sections and to apply a different unit price for drilling 1 m of drilling depending on the substrate. After a detailed analysis of the tender documentation, including the SWZ and an analysis of the legal status, the advocates and attorneys of the Law Firm presented the Client with arguments supporting the assumption that the method of settlement used by the GDDKiA was in contradiction with the concluded agreement and recommended further solutions to the contractor.

The Lawyers of the Law Firm’s analysis also covered the issue of contractual penalties charged by the GDDKiA in connection with the contractor’s delay in the performance of individual studies covered by the contract, including the design of geological works, documentation of soil exploration, geological-engineering documentation, hydrogeological documentation or the programme concept.

Also in this respect, a detailed analysis of the contractual documentation and the factual circumstances accompanying the performance of the contract was carried out in order to build a factual and legal argumentation aimed at refuting the legitimacy of the GDDKiA’s claims. Thanks to the previous experience of the Law Firm’s lawyers, gained in the course of representing clients in disputes with the GDDKiA, we also presented an argumentation undermining the methodology of calculating contractual penalties applied by the GDDKiA.