Abstract
This article examines the development, current legal status, and long-range legal implications of shared design. Of special interest is the practice of assigning significant responsibility for specialty design to those who have no direct contractual relationship with the owner of the project or the owner's primary design professional. Part II examines how specialty design-build fits into the context of established design and construction contract structures. Part III explores the contract and tort theories that govern the liability of project participants for design errors and defects and that will guide courts, arbitrators, and construction lawyers who face the shared design conundrum. Part IV reviews why and how the construction industry relies increasingly on shared design practices, particularly specialty design-build, and it challenges the current industry, legislative, and regulatory perspectives on specialty design-build. Part V identifies and offers proposals concerning the fundamental policy considerations that should inform legislatures, regulatory agencies, courts, mediators, arbitrators, and construction lawyers as they face the unique responsibility and risk allocation issues of this new design-build world.
Recommended Citation
Carl J. Circo,
When Specialty Designs Cause Building Disasters: Responsibility for Shared Architectural and Engineering Services,
84 Neb. L. Rev.
(2005)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol84/iss1/4