Abstract
Differing site conditions clauses are ubiquitous, and sometimes required, in construction contracts. Typical of these clauses are provisions that call for an equitable adjustment to the contract in the event that conditions at the site are materially different from those indicated in the contract documents, or if the conditions are materially different from what one would normally expect to encounter at the site. In tension with the traditional differing site conditions clauses are disclaimers of responsibility for soils reports and other site information included in the contract documents that are intended to shift responsibility for assessing site conditions from the owner who provides the information to the contractor that is doing the work. The California Court of Appeals held in Condon-Johnson and Associates, Inc. v. Sacramento Municipal Utility District that a general disclaimer of provided soils reports is not enough to overcome a statutory differing site conditions clause.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
