Can a principal reject an offer for repair?

In the following case (Rb. Noord-Holland 30-06-2021, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2021:9954, RVR 2022/9), an important boundary is drawn regarding the freedom of a principal to determine how repair work should be carried out. The core of the ruling is that the principal cannot make unlimited demands on how the repair work should be performed.

While the principal does have the right to set specific requirements for the execution of repair work, these demands cannot be so far-reaching that they unjustifiably hinder the work, especially if the alternative method of repair is equivalent.

When parties become divided over the execution of repair work, it is advisable to engage an expert. This expert can help determine which method of repair meets the requirements of proper and sound workmanship. However, it is important to understand that repairing in a manner different from that proposed by the expert is not automatically defective. This ruling makes clear that refusing an alternative repair method can only be justified if it is proven that the chosen method does not meet the standards of good work.

Refusing an alternative method of repair can have significant consequences for the principal. It could result in the principal's default, meaning the contractor is no longer in breach and, therefore, the obligation to claim damages or other demands cannot be enforced. If the repair work has already been carried out by a third party, the consequences can be even more severe.

Furthermore, this case emphasizes the importance of how a claim is formulated. In this case, the principal filed a subsidiary claim, asking the contractor to be ordered to carry out the repair work in a specific way. The Court rejected this claim, believing that the contractor has the right to decide how the repair work should be carried out. The wording of the claim could have been different to avoid this rejection. Therefore, careful and thoughtful phrasing is essential in legal proceedings concerning repair work.

In summary, the principal is not entirely free to determine how repair work should be carried out, and careful consideration must be given to the conditions and phrasing of claims, as well as the potential risks of insisting on specific demands without solid justification.

For any questions, you can contact one of our Litigation attorneys via email at [email protected] or by phone at 06-58987775.