- Liquidated damages and estoppel (HSM v Aker)
- Original news
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- HSM’s claim for particular items
- Case details
Construction analysis: The court held, in the context of a LOGIC sub-contract, that the effect of a subsequent memorandum of understanding (MoU) was that there was no binding ready for sail away (RfSA) date to trigger liquidated damages, that the approval of invoices by the contractor did not amount to an estoppel and that the sub-contractor was not entitled under the terms of the MoU to recover certain sums (nor could it rely on an estoppel in this regard either).
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial