Excuse me if I can't be arsed to read the whole thread.
I have always seen the contract as the wrapper in which work can be done and should be paid for if done. If a contract is terminated early, then no work can be done once the contract is finished. That's the simple bit.
But, IMO, the contract is no more a framework under which work can be done. There are various reasons why work might not be done, and if one of these reasons arises, then no payment is due. These reasons include:
- Contractor not available
- No work needs doing
- The supplier decides to engage another contractor.
This is about T&M contracts - maybe a fixed price contract is different.
Of course, my assumptions may be incorrect in which case it would be great if someone could win a court case on this.
I have always seen the contract as the wrapper in which work can be done and should be paid for if done. If a contract is terminated early, then no work can be done once the contract is finished. That's the simple bit.
But, IMO, the contract is no more a framework under which work can be done. There are various reasons why work might not be done, and if one of these reasons arises, then no payment is due. These reasons include:
- Contractor not available
- No work needs doing
- The supplier decides to engage another contractor.
This is about T&M contracts - maybe a fixed price contract is different.
Of course, my assumptions may be incorrect in which case it would be great if someone could win a court case on this.
Comment