EXTEAS AND ALTEEATIONS 135 



made to the Irish case of Connor v. Belfast Water Commis- 

 sioners, 1871, 5 Ir. L. K., C. L. 55. There the plaintiff 

 contracted to do certain works for the defendant commis- 

 sioners. The contract provided that no extras should be made 

 without an order in writing, and that such extra works should 

 be valued by the engineer, and that the valuation should be 

 final. It also provided that if extra works were ordered, the 

 contractor should send in accounts within a month, and that 

 in default of his doing so, the defendants should not be bound 

 to pay for them. It was also provided that the defendants 

 should not be bound to pay for any works, except upon the 

 production of a certificate signed by some principal or resident 

 engineer ; and that the principal engineers or engineer for the 

 time being should be the exclusive judges of the execution of 

 the works and of everything connected with the contract ; and 

 that the certificates under their or his hands or hand should 

 be binding and conclusive on both parties. It was held that, 

 the engineers having given a certificate for the extra works, 

 the defendants were precluded from setting up as defences to 

 the action for the price of the extra works, that the extra works 

 had not been ordered in writing, and that no accounts had 

 been sent in for them, as required by the deed. The final 

 certificate will not, however, be conclusive as to extras if 

 orders for them have to be signed by some one else besides 

 the engineers. (See, e.g., Lorden v. Pryce, cited Chap. XIV., 5, 

 post.) 



The final certificate may also amount to a determination 

 by the engineer as to whether certain things are extras or not. 

 This was held to be so in a case arising on a contract which 

 provided that all extras or additions should be paid for at the 

 price fixed by the surveyor appointed by the contractor's 

 employer. It was held that his certificate awarding a certain 

 amount to be due for extras was conclusive (Richards v. 

 May, 1883, 10 Q. B. D. 400). 



11. Whether arbitration clause applies to. It is probable 

 that in most contracts, the finality of the engineer's decision 

 in relation to extras is not affected by the arbitration clause. 

 In one case (Pasliby v. Birmingham Corporation, 1856, 18 C. B. 

 2) a contract for the erection of a jail provided, in the usual 

 way, that no alterations should be made without the architect's 

 authority. By the arbitration clause any disputes with the 



