International Arbitration

Architecture/Engineering Design Firm vs. Construction Joint Venture

Rail system Transportation

Providing Insight for LCC Rules Arbitration

An architecture/engineering design firm retained Exponent in its claim against an A/E contractor to provide expert research, analysis, and objective guidance.

The Challenge

A construction joint venture (JV) contracted with an architecture/engineering (A/E) design firm to develop detailed design documents and specifications for tunnels, underground stations, elevated stations, viaducts and other civil infrastructure associated with the construction of a major urban metro rail system in the Middle East.

The A/E firm alleged that the baseline design, as set by the owner and JV, continually changed, requiring multiple updates affecting the A/E firm's ability to meet contractual milestones.

A dispute arose between the two parties as to the root cause of the changes and whether the design provided by the A/E firm met the applicable standard of care in the metro rail industry.

The Exponent Approach

The A/E firm's outside counsel retained Exponent to assess the root causes of the design changes, the design document's level of completion relative to contractually designed milestones, and whether the design provided by the A/E firm was appropriate relative to the industry standard of care.

Exponent's team prepared a written report and gave evidence at the arbitration hearings.