Law and Legal Aspects of Project Management

Law and Legal Aspects of Project Management

Table of Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................3
Evaluate the common challenges faced by the Procurement and Supply chain managers and how
to overcome them............................................................................................................................3
Appraise the main contracting issues for major programs and projects for successful completion 5
Critique the main legal issues that relate to the formation of relationships in supply chain...........7
Appraise the legal implications of contractual non performance in procurement and supply........8
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................9
Recommendations............................................................................................................................9
References......................................................................................................................................11

Introduction
Construction projects are often complicated and needs to be properly handled in order to ensure
that the contract is successful that helps the project as well. The project management is a process
through which an activity is effectively organised, planned and controlled and executed to
achieve the key objectives of the project (Kötz, 2017). There could be number of problems in the
project management and hence it is extremely important to manage them effectively to make
sure the project is successfully completed. The present case of A Rive Venues is quite clear.
There are no problems understanding that the organisation has suffered issues due to the
organisations it hired and they did not deliver. It is extremely important to note that in project
management each and every organisations or entities have to perform in order to achieve the
overall objectives of the project and in this case companies hired by A-Rive Venues have not
operated well. The organisation A-Rive Venues have faced negligence in deliverance of
objectives because the sub contractors like Construct it quick and “Brights” have not performed
well. In this scenario the legal aspects that A Rive could implement to safeguard them from
liability is discussed.
Evaluate the common challenges faced by the Procurement and Supply chain managers
and how to overcome them
The organisation A-Rive Venues were to focus on developing few temporary spaces for the
Olympics and the organisation received Government contract to do so with revised contracts and
negotiated price but the organisation was not able to complete the project at the given time
because the organisation faced several problems and one of the major being procurement and
supply chain problem. The managers of A-Rive Venues focused on getting its supply chain to
operate in the best possible manner to achieve the objectives but it failed because the
organisations with whom the organisation contracted failed to deliver the product on time. This
is where the law and legal aspects come into the picture (Boyle, 2017). One of the major
supplier and procurement problems that the organisation failed to pick up was the ability to
ensure that the suppliers were completely legally and financially qualified to deliver the product.
It is extremely important to note that in project management supplier relationship is considered
extremely important but it is also important to have a professional relationship with them which
the organisation in the present case completely failed to have which clearly affected the entire

project. From the case it could be said that there have been number of problems that the
organisation faced and did not make an attempt to change them even though there was
significant possibility of facing disastrous results (Heldman, 2018). Having a good relationship
with the supplies means the organisation will be able to stretch itself to take risks because it will
help the organisation to make suitable decisions for the project and also support it effectively. In
this case A-Rive did take effective risks but it was unfortunate that the organisations taking part
in the project have not shown complete transparency while taking the project in the hands.
Another major aspect which comes into the picture in this case is there was not proper project
risk planning done by the organisation A-Rive because when one organisation was announced
bankrupt and was not in a position to continue the operations it took the organisation significant
amount of time to manage another new supplier of services and in elevated prices which also
added to the problems in the project. It is important to consider the position of the organisation in
this scenario because it would largely help the organisation to ensure the company is able to get
the best possible team to work for them. Risk management is extremely important for every
organisation and for project management it becomes a priority because it is the stakeholders’
investment at stake (Turner, 2016).
Strategy selection is another major problem that the supply chain managers of the organisation
has had to face because it clearly showed that the organisation A-Rive hasn’t experienced this
big a tender and hence has lesser experience to manage projects like this. It is important to note
that the organisation would require taking more responsibilities which would help the
organisation to get the entire project done responsibly and successfully. The professionals of A-
Rive have suffered to make effective decisions for the organisation which is because the
organisation has not been able to decide on their strategic system properly (Heagney, 2016). This
was a bigger contract and the organisation had to be extremely focused on making the right
decisions which they did not do. It is extremely important for the organisation to make sure that
legally the paperwork should have been done in the best possible manner which would have
helped the organisation to at least avert this kind of scenario.
Another major problem that the supply chain managers of the organisation A-Rive have faced is
managing the stakeholders. The end result for the organisation has not been good because the
company has not been able to manage the project successfully which has led to minor injury to

the celebrity commentator which the organisation is going to get back through legal procedures
and the organisation professionally has been devastated because its professional image has also
got tainted which would affect its future contracts as well. It is the responsibility of the
organisation to ensure that the company is able to manage its stakeholders in the best possible
manner so that they are always informed about the progress being made by the organisation. It
could be said that A-Rive should have been more proactive in communicating with the
stakeholders key to the organisational success because it would help the organisation to get the
best possible result. Hence it could be said that the main focus of the supply chain managers is
to build a strong supplier management relationship which would help to make sure the
organisation is able to perform effectively as well as evaluate the same whenever required for the
best possible operation of the project (Steyn et al., 2016). In this case A-Rive probably did not
have an effective evaluation system in place as the organisation was not able to manage the
supplier relationship properly and in return got deeply affected by the overall operations of the
project.
The responsibility of the organisation A-Rive Venues stands to be important in this case. The
main responsibility and aim of the project stands to be the deliverance of objectives set by the
major stakeholders of the project. In this case the prime aim of the organisation was to deliver
four different temporary venues for the Olympics Basketball venue. As per legal contract the
main responsibility of the organisation A-Rive stands to be to deliver the venues within time
failing which an organisation could be sued for breaching the contract. There are significant
project management laws which would have to be implemented in order to make sure the project
is successful. It is indeed a huge aspect for the organisation to consider the contract strategy
effectively. One of the major aspects in project management is contract. It is important that the
organisation hiring another organisation focuses on having an excellent understanding of
contract law in the project management (Kerzner and Kerzner, 2017).
Appraise the main contracting issues for major programs and projects for successful
completion
According to the Contract Act 1990 (applicable) it is important for the project organisation to
ensure that there are certain key conditions apart from the basic elements of contract to make
sure the contract is strongly bound. As per the principal contract that took place between A-Rive

and the Government, it is important to note that the organisation will have to be held responsible
for the overall completion of the project. It can be said that the Project manager of the
organisation A-Rive should have been much more careful in order to ensure that the organisation
is able to communicate with the sub contractors effectively and get the best possible result from
the organisation. One of the major cases where the PM was held responsible for the failure of a
project is Royal Brompton Hospital NHS Trust–v- Hammond (2003) 88 Con LR 1 in 2003 where
the judge addressed that the main role of the PM is to coordinate the project as per the interest of
the client because the PM directly represents the project management organisation (O'Sullivan
and Hilliard, 2016).
It cannot be denied that the organisation should have been able to create a certain level of
professional accountability among the sub contractor even. In the present case it is extremely
clear that one of the major parts of contract that condition has not been properly highlighted. In
the present case it is extremely important to note that the organisation A-Rive contracted with the
organisation “Construct it Quick” and “Brights” for the construction and electrical operations. It
is extremely important to note that the organisation completely failed to create conditions for the
work to be operated effectively.
As per the case Six Continents Retail Limited v Carford Catering Limited [2003] EWCA Civ
1790 it also remains to be the responsibility of the sub contractor to make sure all the
installations are done effectively as per the proper guidelines which did not happen in this case or
else the celebrity commentator wouldn’t have been injured. It is extremely important for the
organisation to ensure A-Rive to have a strong condition which would help to operate effectively
and get the project completed successfully (Clack, Bakshi and Braine, 2016). Contract condition
stands to be an extremely important aspect to be discussed in this case because the contract
procedure for projects could be bespoke with numerous conditions being inserted in the form
which helps organisations to ensure success in the project. The confusion in the contract has been
clearly shown in the case Carillion Construction Ltd v Woods Bagot Europe Ltd & Ors [2016]
EWHC 905 (TCC) (28 April 2016) where there has been problems with the sub contractor
because the bespoke form has not been filled properly which clearly eliminated some of the
condition for an organisation to operate in favor of another organisation. This case showed that
improper insertion of clauses and conditions might affect and delay entire project and hence it is

extremely important for the organisations like A-Rive Venues to make sure the conditions and
contracts are effectively framed for better results in the future (Smits, 2017).
Critique the main legal issues that relate to the formation of relationships in supply chain
It is important to note that the liability in the project is an extremely important aspect and have to
be kept in mind by the organisation A-Rive Venues. The liability of the failure of the project
entirely goes to the company as the client that is the government will sue the organisation as it
doesn’t know anyone else related to the project. It is important to note that the organisation will
require focusing on implement strong statement ahead to safeguard its interest. The liability of
the organisation would be held from the point of view of financial matters. It is important to note
that the organisation A-Rive could claim for financial compensation from the organisation
Construct it Quick and even from Brights stating the fact that there have been professional
negligence. It is important to note in this case that professional negligence is an action which is
not done in line with the project management activities and since Brights did not follow the
guidelines during the installation it could be sued pretty unlike the case Peter Kellie and Kelly
Kellie v Wheatley & Lloyd Architects Limited [2014] EWHC 2886 (TCC) (Stone and Devenney,
2017). On the other hand duty is another major aspect which would have to be kept in mind by
the organisation A-Rive in this case because the organisation had the duty of completing the
project within the given time and it failed and hence assumption of responsibility and duty comes
into the picture which is pretty similar to the case of Hunt v Optima (Cambridge) Ltd [2014]
EWCA Civ 714 (Cartwright, 2016).
Even though the organisation was not directly involved in the construction and the project was
passed to sub contractors the organisation A-Rive clearly has liability for the failure of the
project which was clearly analysed in the case Sinclair v Woods of Winchester [2005]. This case
clearly analysed to what extent the liability of the contractor exists when a project is developed
with defects or the project failed to complete within time. The UK courts do implement
significant research on understanding whether the breach in contract is the key reason for losses
happened to the project organisations which has been clearly showed in the case of Great
Eastern Hotel Co Ltd v John Laing Construction Ltd & Anor [2005] EWHC 181. This case has
helped to implement common sense on the cause of loss (Adriaanse, 2016).

Appraise the legal implications of contractual non performance in procurement and supply
In Greaves v Baynham Meikle 1975 it was clear that the organisation is accused mainly assessing
the purpose and level of diligence and duty showed towards a project. In this case it is clear that
the organisation has not been able to show proper skills in selecting the subcontractor which
clearly questions the role and duty of the contractor organisation in this case A-Rive venues.
The law deals with the responsibility of design and hence the electrical defect might completely
go against the parent contractor and hence it is extremely important that the company is able to
prepare strong statements against non performance under contract (Adriaanse, 2016). As the
contract mainly was to develop temporary venues for the London Olympics and the organisation
failed to do that the client in this case the Government would be pretty clear to sue the
organisation and repudiate the contract as it happened in the case Bettini v Gye (1876) QBD 183
where the court rightly breached the contract because the acceptor of the contract was not able to
perform as per the contract (Burnett, 2016).
The Hong Kong Fir Shipping v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha [1962] 2 QB 26 Court of Appeal also
pretty clearly highlighted that the organisation suffering loss on the contract will be able to
breach the contract and clearly call for compensation which is the natural action that could be
taken in order to ensure proper verdict. The concept of innominate terms was brought in for
effective analysis of the case (Smits, 2017). Hence in this case it could be considered that the
organisation A-Rive venue was not able to act as per the contractual obligation and hence it is
exposed to legal obligation on the basis of non performance. In this case the organisation might
not get a second chance in the contract because the Olympics already started when the case
exposed and the organisation didn’t have much time to recover the damages and hence the client
would want a complete compensation for the entire project. Hence it is extremely important that
the organisation look for statements that would be able to defend themselves (Haapio and
Hagan , 2016).

Conclusion
It is extremely important for the organisation to implement certain key steps to mitigate the
challenges and resolve the existing problems to successfully complete the task. One of the major
problems that the organisation faced during the project is the selection of service providers. The
organisation needs to implement an effective strategy which would help the company to get the
best possible result. Firstly it is important for the organisation to analyse the sub contractors
properly getting their overall financial statements to check the financial stability of the
organisation which would help the company to select the right vendor for the job that qualifies
all the criteria especially the financial stability. It cannot be denied that the main contractor in
this case A-Rive Venue is responsible for the design of the entire project and hence it will have
to take the responsibility for making it right again and hence the design of the overall project
especially construction and electrical system has to be reassessed which would help to mitigate
the existing challenge and pressure (Steyn et al., 2016).
Recommendations
As the organisation is facing all the liabilities it is important that the organisation revisit their
contract clauses and revisit the negotiations to make changes in certain clauses. The exclusion
clause of the project would have to be remade. The organisation should focus on changing the
exclusion clause in a case to make them completely free of liability in case the sub contractors
fail to complete the project as shown in the case L'Estrange v Graucob [1934] 2 KB 394. It is
important for the organisation to make sure that the organisation is partially or completely saved
from the issue. It could be still negotiated with the client to include this clause to partially take
the responsibility and hence this will largely help to mitigate the impact on the organisation.
Conditions have to be clearly mentioned in the contracts with the sub contractors which would
help the organisation to make sure the entire project runs well and without any kind of hassle
(Cartwright, 2016). The organisation ‘Brights” could be accused of knowing the defect or
completely overlooking it showing negligence of performance as it was showed in the case of In
Plant v Adams [2000]. In this case the sub contractor was accused of negligence in performance
as it also has a significant role to play and also have the duty in the safety and security of the
people and hence it is clear from this case that “Brights” could be charged and compensation
could be asked for the damage caused to the organisation A-Rive Venue. Hence revising the

contracts formed with these organisations should be revisited and key clauses will have to be
inserted in terms of exclusion and sharing of liability which would help the organisation to
reduce much of the pressure and get these sub contractors to act proactively which would help to
achieve the project deliverables in the best possible manner (Monateri, 2017). In the case Newton
Abbott Development Co. Ltd v Stockman Brothers [1931] it was stated that the organisation
facing loss from a project is clearly entitled to get compensation from the sub contractors
involved in non performance. Overall it could be said that the organisation A-Rive Venue will
have to seek legal help in order to clearly make the claimant understand the duties, liability, duty
and to what extent it feels it has the responsibility in the failure of the project which would help
the organisation to mitigate the legal challenge and in order to complete the project successfully
the organisation needs to reinstate the subcontractors analysing the background properly and
understanding their performance abilities before giving the project (Stone and Devenney, 2017).

References
Adriaanse, M.J., 2016. Construction contract law. Palgrave Macmillan.
Boyle, G., 2017. Design project management. Routledge.
Burnett, R., 2016. Outsourcing IT-the legal aspects: Planning, contracting, managing and the
law. Routledge.
Cartwright, J., 2016. Contract law: An introduction to the English law of contract for the civil
lawyer. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Clack, C.D., Bakshi, V.A. and Braine, L., 2016. Smart contract templates: foundations, design
landscape and research directions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.00771.
Haapio, H. and Hagan, M., 2016. Design patterns for contracts.
Heagney, J., 2016. Fundamentals of project management. AMACOM Div American Mgmt
Assn.
Heldman, K., 2018. PMP: project management professional exam study guide. John Wiley &
Sons.
Kerzner, H. and Kerzner, H.R., 2017. Project management: a systems approach to planning,
scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley & Sons.
Kötz, H., 2017. European contract law. Oxford University Press.
Monateri, P.G. ed., 2017. Comparative Contract Law. Edward Elgar Publishing.
O'Sullivan, J. and Hilliard, J., 2016. The law of contract. Oxford University Press.
Smits, J.M. ed., 2017. Contract law: a comparative introduction. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Steyn, H., Dekker, A.H., Kuschke, B., Van Eck, B.P.S. and Visser, K., 2016. Project
management: A multi-disciplinary approach. FPM Publishing.
Stone, R. and Devenney, J., 2017. The modern law of contract. Routledge.
Turner, R., 2016. Gower handbook of project management. Routledge.