TOP TEN CONSTRUCTION CLAUSES - PART VIII - INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
TOP TEN CONSTRUCTION CLAUSES
PART VIII—INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
This
is the eighth installment in a ten-part series analyzing critical construction
clauses. This installment analyzes the “Incorporation
by Reference” provision. The first seven articles can be found on our blog at http://sotolawgroup.blogspot.com/.
The
incorporation by reference clause, sometimes called a flow-down or pour-over
clause is the basis by which parties to a contract include upstream contract
requirements without specifically attaching them. Typically, this occurs
between the contactor and subcontractors. Below is the pertinent section of the
incorporation clause taken from AIA form A401.
AIA "Standard Form of Contract Between Contractor and Subcontractor" (A401)
Article 1
The Subcontract Documents
1.The Subcontract Documents consist of (1) this Agreement; (2) the Prime
Contract, consisting of the Agreement between the Owner and Contractor and the
other Contract Documents enumerated therein, including Conditions of the
Contract (General, Supplementary and other Conditions), Drawings,
Specifications, Addenda issued prior to the execution of the Agreement between
the Owner and Contractor and Modifications issued subsequent to the execution
of the Agreement between the Owner and Contractor, whether before or after the
execution of this Agreement, and other Contract Documents, if any, listed in
the Owner-Contractor Agreement;... These form the Subcontract, and are as fully
a part of the Subcontract as if attached to this Agreement or repeated herein
...
Careless
treatment of these clauses can be detrimental to a contractor, subcontractor or
supplier's expectations and understandings of what exactly is being agreed to
in a contract. From a project Owner or developer's standpoint, incorporation
clauses can create unintended conflicts and ambiguities which negatively impact
the rights, obligations and liabilities of the parties.
The
case of Katner v. Boutin, 624 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) deals with a
settlement agreement between two parties, where one party believed that they
were receiving a piece of property free of encumbrances. The settlement
agreement referenced a lease agreement and a purchase agreement that were
executed simultaneously without knowledge of one of the parties. The purchase
agreement that was referenced by the lease gave the purchaser the continuing
right of first refusal on the sale of the piece of property and created an
encumbrance on the property. The court found that there was no intent to be
bound by what was in the collateral documents (ie the lease agreement and
purchase agreement) because it was not referenced to in the settlement
agreement.
So
what is required to incorporate a document correctly? The document pretending
to incorporate an extrinsic document must state specifically that it is subject
to the document to be incorporated and the document incorporated must be
specifically described and or referred to in the incorporating document in such
a way to make clear that the parties intended to incorporate it.
In
the case of Temple Emanu-El of Greater Fort Lauderdale v. Tremarco Indus.,
Inc., 705 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) there was a contract between the owner
and the contractor to install a roof system. One of the provisions of the
contract provided that contractor would provide a performance warranty on the
roof. The owner later sued the contractor and the contractor tried to use a
warranty that was referenced in the document to govern the whole contract. The
court found that the contract and warranty were not incorporated merely because
the warranty was merely referenced. There was no intent found by the court for
the parties to be bound by the warranty.
Incorporating
extrinsic documents can create unintended consequences. A recent example of
this comes from Int'l Eng'g Servs. v. Scherer Constr. & Eng'g of Cent.
Fla., LLC, 74 So. 3d 531, 532-34 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). IES, a subcontractor
appealed the entry of a final summary judgment in favor of its general
contractor, Scherer, on a breach of contract claim.
According
to the subcontract, IES agreed to perform certain structural steel work on a
project in Maitland, Florida. IES performed its work under the contract but was
not paid by Scherer. When IES then brought suit against Scherer, Scherer raised
the affirmative defense that the subcontract contained a pay-when-paid clause,
which provided that payment by the project owner to Scherer was an express
condition precedent to paying IES. Scherer argued that because it had not been
paid by the project owner, it did not have to pay IES. The lower court entered
the summary judgment in favor of Scherer based on the pay-when-paid clause in
the subcontract.
The
appellate court held that an ambiguity in the contract was created when the subcontract
incorporated the prime contract between Scherer and the owner. Article 2 in the
subcontract states:
The
"Contract Documents" for this Subcontract consist of this Agreement,
the terms, conditions or instructions contained in the transmittal letter from
the Contractor to the Subcontractor delivering this subcontract for execution
by the Subcontractor, any exhibits attached hereto, the Agreement between the
Owner and Contractor dated (prime contract), the conditions of the Architect,
all approved drawings and architectural plans and specifications, all
modifications issued prior to execution of the Agreement between the Owner and
Contractor, and all modifications issued subsequent thereto.
The
appellate court found that the prime contract, which was incorporated by
reference, provided that the owner was not required to pay the contractor until
it had paid its subcontractors. The court explained that this created an
ambiguity which had to be resolved against the contractor and further interpreted
to require the contractor to pay IES within a reasonable time, not when actual
payment was received by the owner. Int'l Eng'g Servs. v. Scherer Constr. &
Eng'g of Cent. Fla., LLC, 74 So. 3d at 532-34.
Practice Points:
Key contracts clauses typically incorporated by reference:
Venue of dispute
Arbitration or Litigation Option
Waiver of certain damages including consequential damages
Liquidated damages
Pay when paid
Affected
party needs to specifically review the upstream incorporated documents and
establish at inception the carved out flow down items, which are not accepted!
Comments
Post a Comment