Author
Listed:
- P. Kennedy
- A. Morrison
- D. O. Milne
Abstract
Set-off relates to the situation where a main contractor raises a counterclaim against a subcontractor's claim or where an employer raises a counterclaim against the main contractor. The alternative terms cross claim, counterclaim, contra charge, compensation and retention are explained in the context of Scots law. Set-off in the construction industry in Scotland is then discussed within the contractual frameworks upon which main contractors are entitled to exercise such rights and how these conditions of contract have been formed over recent years. A study reported shows the extent of the use of amended and unamended forms of subcontract and main contractors' own forms of subcontract which imposed more onerous set-off conditions than the standard forms, the reasons given by main contractors for exercising their rights of set-off, the level of satisfaction amongst subcontractors with the sums set-off against them, the means by which main contractors and subcontractors settled disputed set-offs, and subcontractors' reasons for accepting unsatisfactory instances of set-off. The research was undertaken using a questionnaire to a stratified sample of subcontractors throughout central Scotland in 1995. Forty-seven subcontractors responded to the questionnaire and 427 instances of set-off were recorded. The study indicated that, despite the considerable protection given to subcontractors in the standard forms of subcontract and in common law, they were prepared to settle set-offs with which they were dissatisfied without initiating contractual proceedings which would have improved their situation. It would appear from this study that subcontractors are reluctant to use their contractual entitlements either because of fears over the costs of disputing set-offs or because they fear that they will be denied opportunities to tender for work in the future. Until there is a culture shift in the industry, reliance on contractual conditions alone may be inadequate to meet the needs of subcontractors.
Suggested Citation
P. Kennedy & A. Morrison & D. O. Milne, 1997.
"Resolution of disputes arising from set-off clauses between main contractors and subcontractors,"
Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(6), pages 527-537.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:15:y:1997:i:6:p:527-537
DOI: 10.1080/014461997372737
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:15:y:1997:i:6:p:527-537. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.