The state customer did not assist the contractor in the work - the courts did not collect a penalty for the delay
During the preparation of the project documentation, the contractor revealed that the scope of work differs from the terms of the procurement. He suspended the execution and asked the customer to agree on additional work or terminate the deal by agreement.
The customer considered that additional work was taken into account in the contract, and demanded to complete the project. I did not sign the acts for the work that were actually completed. Later, he went to court to terminate the contract and collect a penalty.
Three instances of the customer did not support:
- the contractor informed the customer about the obstacles in advance, suspended work. He took all measures for the proper performance of the contract and acted in good faith;
- the customer did not resolve the issues that the contractor had in time. This prevented us from completing the work on time. Since the latter is not to blame for the delay, there are no grounds for a penalty.
In practice, there is an example when the courts also did not recover a penalty for delay from the contractor, because he tried to complete the work on time, but the customer was slow to respond to his requests and delayed the time for agreeing on the necessary data.