Norland Construction (Pty) Ltd v O R Tambo District Municipality (37/2015) [2017] ZAECGHC 87 (4 July 2017)

Norland Construction (Pty) Ltd v O R Tambo District Municipality (37/2015) [2017] ZAECGHC 87 (4 July 2017)

The court found that the delay of 55 days was entirely beyond the plaintiff's control, as the employment system for the local workforce was managed by the community-based Project Steering Committee and the Municipality, leaving the plaintiff powerless to resolve the unrest. The adverse physical conditions encountered during construction were not reasonably foreseeable by an experienced contractor, as neither the tender documents nor the drawings indicated any warning signs, and even the Engineer had not anticipated the problems. The plaintiff complied with the contractual claims procedure by timely notification and record-keeping, submitting claims as soon as practicable. The adjudicator...

Citation
[2017] ZAECGHC 87
Parties
Plaintiff: Norland Construction (Pty) Ltd; Defendant: O R Tambo District Municipality
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 July 2017
Case Number
37/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff's claims for extensions of time and payment of additional costs are upheld.
Judges
C Plasket
Legal Topics
Construction Contracts, Extension of Time, Adverse Physical Conditions, Contractual Compliance, Time Barring, Claims Procedure
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Construction Contracts Extension of Time Adverse Physical Conditions Contractual Compliance Time Barring Claims Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Norland Construction (Pty) Ltd

Plaintiff

O R Tambo District Municipality

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the delay of 55 days due to labour unrest was entirely beyond the plaintiff's control.
  2. 2 Whether the adverse physical conditions encountered were reasonably foreseeable by an experienced contractor at the time of tendering.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff complied with the contractual procedure for lodging claims for extensions of time and additional costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the delay of 55 days was entirely beyond the plaintiff's control, as the employment system for the local workforce was managed by the community-based Project Steering Committee and the Municipality, leaving the plaintiff powerless to resolve the unrest. The adverse physical conditions encountered during construction were not reasonably foreseeable by an experienced contractor, as neither the tender documents nor the drawings indicated any warning signs, and even the Engineer had not anticipated the problems. The plaintiff complied with the contractual claims procedure by timely notification and record-keeping, submitting claims as soon as practicable. The adjudicator...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claims for extensions of time and payment of additional costs are upheld.

Orders

  • It is declared that the plaintiff is entitled to extensions of time of 55 and 187 days in relation to claims 1 and 2.
  • The defendant is directed to pay to the plaintiff the amount of R1 054 500.52 plus VAT in respect of claim 1, with interest at the prescribed rate from date of demand to date of payment.