Shopping Cart (0) items Sign In

Construction Claims Monthly - Devoted exclusively to the problems of construction contracting since 1963

‹ Prev article: 
 

Parties Are Bound By Their Contractual Intentions If Ambiguity Later Emerges

Sunday, February 04, 2007 11:30 am

 
Parties Are Bound By Their Contractual Intentions If Ambiguity Later Emerges

The Appellate Court of Connecticut refused to admit extrinsic evidence to explain an alleged ambiguity in a contract because the parties' intentions were clear when they signed the contract.

The United States Navy (Navy) solicited bids on the Dolphin Gardens Demolition (Demolition) on a Navy submarine base. The solicitation required that the general contractor be a "small disadvantaged business concern" under 13 C.F.R. 124-(8)(a) (SDBC). Plaintiff Stamford Wrecking Company (Stamford) could not bid directly on the Demolition because it was not a SDBC. Instead, Stamford and defendant United Stone America, Inc. (United Stone) agreed in writing that if United Stone won the bid it would subcontract the abatement and demolition work to Stamford and retain a certain amount of the work for itself. The parties agreed [...]

 
› Next article: 
 
Sign up now for Construction Claims Monthly Online! Your own virtual help desk of must-have techniques, tutorials, and how-to articles.
 
Join Now Construction Claims Monthly! Close