Vicarious liabiality and who's responsibailities for errors and omissions on consultant's drawings?

I would like to clarify if architect is liable for any errors and omissions on the consultant’s documents.
Accordingly to vicarious liability, I think the answer is yes.
Am I correct?

Thanks for any feedbacks.
Gene

2 Likes

From the way I’m reading the C401 (agreement between Architect and Consultant) it doesn’t look like the Architect is liable for errors and omissions on the consultant’s documents.

Section 2.8.7 states “the Consultant shall cause the primary and excess or umbrella policies for Commercial General Liability…for claims caused in whole or in part by the Consultant’s negligent acts or omissions”

Section 3.1 states “The Consultant shall [be]…subject to the same standards and provisions that the Architect is required to meet under the Prime Agreement”

Section 5.8 states “The Architect shall be entitled to rely on the accuracy and completeness of services and information furnished by the Consultant”

Unless the error or omission relates to conformance with the design documents (the Architect should be reviewing all drawings for general conformance), the Consultant would be liable.

2 Likes

Thank you for your notes.

2 Likes

The C401 states:
Section 3.1 states “The Consultant shall [be]…subject to the same standards and provisions that the Architect is required to meet under the Prime Agreement”
Does this mean that the architect shall furnish a copy of the prime contract, B-101, to the consultant when signing the C401 contract with them?

1 Like

I just happened to read this in the AHPP. It says “Rather than restate all of these rights and responsibilities from the owner-architect agreement—and run the risk of omitting some—it is common to incorporate the owner-architect agreement (often without specifics of the architect’s compensation) into the architect-consultant agreement. This binds the consultant to provide all of the services in its discipline and to be subject to the same terms and conditions the architect owes to the owner.”

3 Likes

Interestingly that on the page 995 of AHPP there is an example of an architect being sued for his structural engineer error because the contract between the architect and the engineer had a liability limit. The engineer agreed to pay $100,000 and the rest (several million) was brought to the architect as he was the holder of the Prime contract with the client.
It looks that the answer is not that simple. The architect in theory is not responsible for the consultant’s errors, but if the consultant cannot satisfy the client’s (or a third party) damages the architect may be held responsible, given he has the Prime contract.

1 Like
6300 N. Northwest Highway P.O. Box 31846, Chicago, IL 60631-9998 / All rights reserved © 2020 Black Spectacles.