Drafting and negotiating subcontracts can be a challenging process for both general contractors and subcontractors. General contractors act as the intermediaries between project owners and subcontractors and are ultimately responsible for the quality and timeliness of the work performed. Their subcontracts must reflect and mitigate these risks. Subcontractors, on the other hand, often face limited negotiation power and need to focus on identifying key risk-shifting provisions to protect their interests.
Below are key areas that both contractors and subcontractors should consider when reviewing and negotiating subcontracts.
Subcontracts typically include a “flow-down” clause, which requires the subcontractor to adhere to the same responsibilities that the general contractor has to the owner. To prevent conflicts, general contractors should:
If the subcontract incorporates the prime contract by reference, subcontractors should request a copy before finalizing the agreement. Understanding the full scope of contractual obligations ensures subcontractors are not blindsided by unforeseen liabilities.
To protect against nonpayment by the owner, general contractors often include contingent payment clauses such as “pay-when-paid” and “pay-if-paid” provisions:
Many states enforce these provisions only if they are explicitly stated in the subcontract. General contractors must ensure that contingent payment clauses are carefully crafted to withstand legal scrutiny.
Subcontractors must assess who bears the financial burden if the owner defaults on payment. Key considerations include:
If the owner goes bankrupt or fails to pay for reasons unrelated to the subcontractor’s work, who absorbs the loss?
Payment terms may extend beyond progress and final payments—delay and change provisions often include similar clauses.
If deletion of “pay-if-paid” clauses isn’t possible, subcontractors should seek a middle ground by modifying risk allocation provisions elsewhere in the contract.
If a dispute arises, the general contractor must ensure consistency between the prime contract and subcontract’s dispute resolution terms. Conflicting dispute mechanisms—such as arbitration in one agreement and litigation in another—can lead to separate disputes with inconsistent rulings and increased legal costs. To mitigate these risks, general contractors should:
Subcontractors often have less control over dispute resolution terms, but they should:
Clearly define work responsibilities to prevent scope creep.
Establish formal procedures for submitting and approving change orders.
Ensure that general liability, workers’ compensation, and project-specific coverage align with contract terms.
Negotiate fair indemnification clauses to protect against third-party claims.
Specify conditions under which termination is justified and whether termination for convenience is allowed.
Outline procedures for curing default to minimize disruption.
Clarify how much retainage will be withheld and when it will be released.
Verify compliance with lien laws to ensure the ability to file a claim if payment issues arise.
Define delay-related compensation, including liquidated damages and excusable delays.
Ensure that subcontractors are not unfairly penalized for delays caused by other parties.
A well-drafted subcontract can be the difference between a successful project and a costly legal battle. General contractors must ensure subcontracts reflect their risks while maintaining fairness for subcontractors. Subcontractors, in turn, must diligently review agreements to identify potential liabilities and payment risks.
By taking proactive steps in contract review, both parties can foster stronger, more sustainable business relationships in an industry where collaboration is essential to success.
Originally reported by Bridge Tower Media Newswires.