68 THE LAW AFFECTING ENGINEERS 



between the employer and the contractor, whether the agree- 

 ment has been performed or not. The fact that the specification 

 which often forms part of the contract between the parties, is 

 usually drawn by the engineer or architect without legal 

 assistance renders it all the more necessary that he should 

 realise the nature of the obligations which are thereby imposed. 

 Accuracy in the preparation of the bills of quantities is also 

 of importance. 



As has been pointed out above, a contract for large works 

 usually consists of several distinct documents namely, the 

 agreement (see Form IIC., post), the general conditions (see 

 Form IIA.,_pos), the specifications and the schedule of prices. 

 All these documents must be consistent with each other, 

 otherwise there may be trouble between the parties. This 

 point is favourably illustrated by a Canadian case (Neelon v. 

 Toronto City, 1895, 25 Can. S.C. Rep. 579). There a contract 

 for the construction of public works contained a clause to the 

 following effect : " In case the works are not carried on with 

 such expedition and with such materials and workmanship as 

 the architect or clerk of the works may deem proper the 

 architect shall be at libert} 7 to give the contractors ten days' 

 notice in writing to supply such additional force or material as 

 in the opinion of the said architect is necessary, and if the 

 contractors fail to supply the same, it shall then be lawful for 

 the said architect to dismiss the said contractors, and to 

 employ other persons to finish the work." It was also 

 provided that " the general conditions are made part of this 

 contract (except so far as inconsistent herewith) in which case 

 the terms of this contract shall govern." It was provided by 

 the "general conditions " that : "Incase the works from the 

 want of sufficient or proper workmen or materials, are not 

 proceeding with all necessary despatch, then the architect 

 may give ten days' notice to do what is necessary, and upon 

 the contractor's failure to do so, the architect shall have the 

 power at his discretion, with the consent in writing of the 

 committee (i.e. the employer), without process or suit at law, 

 to take the work or any part thereof mentioned in such notice 

 out of the hands of the contractor." It was held by the 

 majority of the Court that this last clause was inconsistent 

 with the clause in the contract, and that the latter must 

 govern. The architect, therefore, had power to dismiss the 

 contractor without the consent in writing of the committee. 



