TAR Sardinia In a contract, if the company has claimed to have studied the project and also thought that the price offered and the acceptance of works, alleges design flaws and calls for variations, the contracting is entitled to terminate the agreement undermines the principles of loyalty contracts. It is said that the Tar Sardinia, with the sentence of the second section of the January 25, 2011, No 51, in a story in which, following the award of a contract for work delivered "under the provisions of law," the company awarded the contract had immediately pointed to the charge of proceedings and the director of business operations after various difficulties to those that were submitted as design flaws. The person in charge of the proceedings shall withdraw the award on the basis that the applicant had violated the principle of good faith. The contractor had in fact signed a declaration stating that they have made a thorough study of the project after which the project could well be made for the corresponding price offer made courts declare the lawful termination of the relationship, not before they had also be noted that this was a question concerning the implementation phase of the contract and, therefore, each of which apply the statutory principles. In particular, say the judges, the contractor had seen the contract terminated by the contracting authority as a result of the failure manifesting itself in not having started the work promptly following delivery of pending signing of contract and in having raised "spurious exceptions in order to make the project executive position based on race, claiming, in essence, design changes by adopting a variant of expertise. " In the case of all the judges recognize the unfair conduct of the successful tenderer who has questioned the design choices by giving precedence to their assessments than the contracting and this even before starting work. Therefore, the judges assert that, if before starting work, the company asks that the design change in the race had been the subject of 'study' and was considered "appropriate and feasible for the corresponding price offer presented, "and also calls for new financial resources and reserves to account for the" serious and unjustified financial burdens, "it violates" the duty of conduct that should govern is the execution of the contract to its formation and interpretation. "
(Feat. IO)
0 comments:
Post a Comment