Misleading Plans and Specifications

It is well-recognized that contract documents can be misleading not only for what they expressly state but also for what they imply and fail to disclose. Thus, in S&M Traylor Bros. (Joint Venture), ENGBCA 3878, 82-1 BCA ¶ 15,484, the Board held that the contractor was entitled to recover on its differing site condition claim because the omission of information from the contract was itself an indication of the conditions a contractor could expect to encounter. See also Titan Atlantic Construction Corp., ASBCA 23588, 82-2 BCA ¶ 15,808 (contract’s failure to set forth soil liquid limits implied that the soil could be compacted as required by the specifications without extraordinary effort).

Updated: August 2, 2018