International Arbitration and the Construction Industry: An Introduction to the Field of International Arbitration on October 11, 2019

Albert Bates photo
Albert Bates Jr.
torresr_thumb
R. Zachary Torres-Fowler

Over the past decade, international arbitration has played an increasingly prominent role in the construction industry.  As contractors and owners pursue greater opportunities outside their domestic jurisdictions, international arbitration has provided parties with a reliable, flexible, and neutral forum to resolve disputes.  Indeed, a quick glance at the most recent statistics from any number of the leading international arbitral institutions, such as the International Chamber of Commerce and International Centre for Dispute Resolution, shows that construction arbitration accounts for one of the largest components of the institutions’ caseload.

Continue reading “International Arbitration and the Construction Industry: An Introduction to the Field of International Arbitration on October 11, 2019”

Courts Decline to Impose Liability on Subcontractor Where Contractor Could Not Prove Subcontractor’s Exclusive Control on Shared Project Site

United Illuminating Company v. Whiting-Turner Contracting Co. v. Cherry Hill Construction Co., Inc., et al. v. GEI Consultants, Inc., et al., 3:18-cv-00327-WWE (D. Conn. 2019)

volped_thumb
Danielle J. Volpe

In 2010 The United Illuminating Company (“UI”), an electric utility company, and Whiting-Turner, a construction contractor, entered into a general contractor agreement for the construction of the United Illuminating Central Facility Project (the “Project”) in Orange, Connecticut.  The Project required construction of an office building, an operations building, and related parking lots and common driveways.  Whiting-Turner and Cherry Hill Construction Co. (“Cherry Hill”), a heavy civil construction contractor, then entered into a subcontractor agreement which required Cherry Hill to perform site work.

Continue reading “Courts Decline to Impose Liability on Subcontractor Where Contractor Could Not Prove Subcontractor’s Exclusive Control on Shared Project Site”