Structuring Construction Contracts: Termination for Convenience vs. Termination for Cause
Providing Notice, Calculating Damages, Pros and Cons of Various Termination Provisions
Recording of a 90-minute CLE video webinar with Q&A
This CLE webinar will advise construction attorneys on the use of termination for convenience (TFC) clauses in contracts. The panel will discuss the methods of providing notice of such terminations, how to calculate damages, and how contractors can mitigate risks when entering into agreements with a convenience clause. The panel will address best practices for all stakeholders when considering this type of provision in a construction agreement rather than an TFC clause.
- Termination for convenience
- Good faith
- Right to cure or fix
- Best practices for termination for convenience vs. termination for cause
The panel will address these and other key topics:
- How do the parties determine if the terminating party is acting in good faith?
- What type of notice is typical in an TFC clause?
- How can risks be mitigated in contracts with TFC clauses?
Talor I. Bearman
Mr. Bearman is a member of the firm’s Construction and Infrastructure Practice Group. He has experience working... | Read More
Mr. Bearman is a member of the firm’s Construction and Infrastructure Practice Group. He has experience working on a wide variety of complex commercial litigation matters, with a concentration in construction disputes. Mr. Bearman represents owners, general contractors, subcontractors, and design professionals in all stages of the litigation process. His experience includes representation in both state and federal courts, as well as arbitration proceedings. In addition to litigation, Mr. Bearman advises clients regarding construction-related contracts and project administration.Close
Jason L. Richey
Mr. Richey’s practice is concentrated in the areas of dispute resolution with an emphasis on the construction and... | Read More
Mr. Richey’s practice is concentrated in the areas of dispute resolution with an emphasis on the construction and engineering industry, complex commercial disputes, energy disputes, and state and local bid protests. For almost a quarter century, he has focused his energy on winning litigations, arbitrations, and mediations for his clients. During this time, he has worked on local engagements as well as matters in over 35 different states, Asia, Africa, Europe, Australia, and South America representing companies both large and small. The firm has recently engaged Mr. Richey to lead the Construction Practice Group in the Americas.Close
William D. Wickard
Mr. Wickard concentrates his practice on construction and commercial litigation along with negotiating and drafting... | Read More
Mr. Wickard concentrates his practice on construction and commercial litigation along with negotiating and drafting construction contracts. He has worked on a wide variety of projects (both international and domestic), including oil and gas, offshore oil production facilities, power plants, manufacturing plants, railroads, solar power facilities, wind farms, water treatment plants, steel mills, dams, and health care facilities. Mr. Wickard has been involved in all phases of litigation in a number of state and federal courts, including jury trials, bench trials, injunction and TRO proceedings. He also has handled numerous appeals in several different state and federal jurisdictions. Mr. Wickard also has significant experience with arbitration proceedings. Mr. Wickard has also drafted and negotiated numerous construction contracts, including EPCs, subcontracts, design contracts, and supply contracts, for many different domestic and international projects. Mr. Wickard also represents clients in connection with public procurement issues and has extensive experience in all phases of bid protest proceedings throughout the country.Close