Assignment of a contract, its effects...

_JOE_

Hi all,

Quick hypothetical; domestic construction arbitration, Respondents allege that they were never party to a contract containing an arbitration clause, as the contract containing the arb clause was assigned to them by the original contractors only after the cause of action accrued.

I think the central question is whether the arbitration agreement should be presumed as having been assigned along with the main contract if the parties have not expressly agreed otherwise.
Further, must the respondent have actual or constructive knowledge of the arbitration clause?

Now i know that countries interpret the above differently as regards presumption, notice etc, but i couldn't find any concrete information as to how the above scenario would be construed in ireland. Would the respondents have to be made aware of such clause?

Any help appreciated.

shaneybaby

_JOE_ wrote: »

Hi all,

Quick hypothetical; domestic construction arbitration, Respondents allege that they were never party to a contract containing an arbitration clause, as the contract containing the arb clause was assigned to them by the original contractors only after the cause of action accrued.

I think the central question is whether the arbitration agreement should be presumed as having been assigned along with the main contract if the parties have not expressly agreed otherwise.
Further, must the respondent have actual or constructive knowledge of the arbitration clause?

Now i know that countries interpret the above differently as regards presumption, notice etc, but i couldn't find any concrete information as to how the above scenario would be construed in ireland. Would the respondents have to be made aware of such clause?

Any help appreciated.

Interesting indeed. I suppose it depends on how the contract was assigned to them, did they just sign a letter of intent or was it simply a case of the old contractor having walked off site that they were hauled in without anything being signed? You can't just pick and choose bits of a contract if you're taking over the entire contract but in the same way they would not and can not be held liable if they were not a party to the original contract and then sign nothing in between. Just because they undertook to do the same works doesn't mean it has to be the same contract. Plus not all construction contracts have arbitration clauses in them so constuctive notice won't fly i'd imagine (RIAI yes, GDLA no thats off the top of my head so open to correction as always)

_JOE_

_JOE_ wrote: »

Hi all,

Quick hypothetical; domestic construction arbitration, Respondents allege that they were never party to a contract containing an arbitration clause, as the contract containing the arb clause was assigned to them by the original contractors only after the cause of action accrued.

I think the central question is whether the arbitration agreement should be presumed as having been assigned along with the main contract if the parties have not expressly agreed otherwise.
Further, must the respondent have actual or constructive knowledge of the arbitration clause?

Now i know that countries interpret the above differently as regards presumption, notice etc, but i couldn't find any concrete information as to how the above scenario would be construed in ireland. Would the respondents have to be made aware of such clause?

Any help appreciated.

shaneybaby wrote: »

Interesting indeed. I suppose it depends on how the contract was assigned to them, did they just sign a letter of intent or was it simply a case of the old contractor having walked off site that they were hauled in without anything being signed? You can't just pick and choose bits of a contract if you're taking over the entire contract but in the same way they would not and can not be held liable if they were not a party to the original contract and then sign nothing in between. Just because they undertook to do the same works doesn't mean it has to be the same contract. Plus not all construction contracts have arbitration clauses in them so constuctive notice won't fly i'd imagine (RIAI yes, GDLA no thats off the top of my head so open to correction as always)

Thanks for your input shaneybaby. If for example the whole contract was assigned, (after the cause of action accrued) the nub of my question is how would this me construed?
Does this have to be made expressly to the respondents or are they presumed to know the contents of the assignment?
Really struggling to find any citations here.

shaneybaby

_JOE_ wrote: »

Thanks for your input shaneybaby. If for example the whole contract was assigned, (after the cause of action accrued) the nub of my question is how would this me construed?
Does this have to be made expressly to the respondents or are they presumed to know the contents of the assignment?
Really struggling to find any citations here.

You have to be careful here, were the works assigned or was the contract assigned? If they agreed to take over the works then it has nothing to do with the original contract, if they agreed to take over the contract specifically then they should have read the bloody thing before they signed anything.

I'm not really sure how the action can accrue before the works/contract was assigned. They would have to be indemnified (at least they should have been) for any actions or ommissions by the previous contractor. It's not as simple as just walking onto site and picking up the pick axe the other fella left down.

Not much of an answer but hypothetical and all that it's as good as i can go, i'd say wait until the morning anyway when my ideas get blown out of the water