In the framework of engineering contracts, there are generally two standards of duty which can be imposed on an engineer: reasonable skill and care and fitness for purpose. In our first article covering the commercial side of professional engineering, we take an in-depth look at the differences between the two standards of duty in the context of contracts executed by engineering professionals. We investigate how and when each standard of duty is likely to be imposed in a contract and we identify the implications of each standard from the perspective of both the client and engineer.
Finally, we take look at a pertinent real-world case study of MT Højgaard A/S v E.On Climate & Renewables UK Robin Rigg East Limited, which highlights the importance of understanding these terms in a contractual context.
To learn more on this subject, visit the complete article on Fitness for Purpose vs Reasonable Skill and Care, otherwise, if you're looking for a quick 60-second summary take a look at the table below.
Table 1: A brief comparison of fitness for purpose and reasonable skill and care