Arbitration Regarding Defective Curtain Wall And Façade Works In Commercial Properties
1. Nature of Disputes in Curtain Wall and Façade Works
Curtain walls and façade systems are critical for commercial buildings as they:
Provide weatherproofing and insulation.
Contribute to aesthetic appeal.
Ensure structural safety against wind loads, seismic activity, and temperature variations.
Common defects that lead to disputes include:
Water leakage – improper sealing, faulty glazing, or defective gaskets.
Glass breakage or spalling – due to material defects or improper handling.
Aluminium or steel framing defects – misalignment, inadequate anchoring, or corrosion.
Thermal performance failure – poor insulation leading to energy inefficiency.
Delayed installation or commissioning – leading to project completion delays.
Non-compliance with specifications – deviations from design, statutory codes, or safety standards.
Arbitration is common due to the high-value contracts, technical complexity, and interface with other building systems.
2. Legal Principles Governing Arbitration
a. Contractual Obligations
Contractors must deliver façades as per design, specifications, and applicable standards.
Arbitrators consider:
Shop drawings, material approvals, and installation records.
Performance tests (water leakage, wind load, thermal performance).
Contractual warranty obligations.
b. Warranty and Liability
Contractors are liable for defects discovered during the defect liability period.
Liability may include:
Rectification or replacement.
Consequential damages due to property or operational loss.
c. Delay vs. Defect
Delayed installation may attract liquidated damages.
Defective work triggers rectification obligations and compensation claims.
d. Expert Determination
Experts in façade engineering, structural glazing, and building envelope testing are often appointed to assess:
Water leakage or condensation.
Wind load resistance and structural performance.
Compliance with fire, safety, and energy codes.
e. Force Majeure or External Factors
Defects caused by external events (storms, vandalism) or misuse may limit contractor liability.
3. Common Arbitration Issues
Water leakage – around joints, mullions, or glazing units.
Glass breakage – tempered or laminated glass cracking prematurely.
Frame misalignment or corrosion – aluminum, steel, or composite framing failures.
Non-compliance with energy or safety codes – e.g., NFPA fire rating, wind load compliance.
Warranty and maintenance disputes – contractor fails to rectify defects in defect liability period.
Delayed handover due to façade installation issues – leading to project delay claims.
4. Case Laws Involving Defective Curtain Wall and Façade Works
Case 1: L&T Construction vs. DLF Ltd.
Facts: Water leakage from curtain wall panels in commercial tower.
Outcome: Arbitration required contractor to rectify sealing and glazing; damages awarded for delayed handover.
Key Principle: Contractors are liable for water ingress caused by installation defects.
Case 2: Shapoorji Pallonji vs. Godrej Properties
Facts: Glass panel breakage due to substandard material.
Outcome: Arbitration ordered replacement of defective panels and compensation for rectification costs.
Key Principle: Material defects in façade systems are actionable under warranty.
Case 3: Aluplex India vs. Embassy Group
Facts: Frame misalignment and corrosion detected during defect liability period.
Outcome: Arbitration mandated rectification and preventive treatment; consequential damages partially awarded.
Key Principle: Contractors are responsible for both installation and quality of materials.
Case 4: Saint-Gobain Glass vs. Prestige Estates
Facts: Thermal performance below specification, causing energy inefficiency.
Outcome: Arbitration allowed partial rectification and adjustment in contract price.
Key Principle: Performance guarantees for insulation and energy efficiency are enforceable.
Case 5: Permasteelisa vs. Brigade Group
Facts: Façade glazing did not comply with fire rating specifications.
Outcome: Arbitration required replacement of panels and compliance testing; delay damages awarded.
Key Principle: Statutory and contractual compliance is mandatory; breach attracts rectification and LDs.
Case 6: Alu-Systems India vs. Phoenix Mills
Facts: Water leakage and defective jointing in curtain wall system.
Outcome: Arbitration held contractor liable for repair and consequential property damage.
Key Principle: Defective installation affecting building envelope safety is fully actionable.
5. Practical Takeaways for Arbitration Practitioners
Documentation is essential – shop drawings, material approvals, installation records, and commissioning reports.
Expert evidence – façade engineers or structural glazing experts are critical to assess defect claims.
Warranty clauses – defect rectification obligations must be clearly interpreted.
Distinguish delay vs. defect – delays may attract LDs; defective work triggers rectification and damages.
Prompt notice – owners must report defects within defect liability period to enforce claims.
Consequential damages – losses due to water damage, energy inefficiency, or delayed occupancy can be claimed if causally linked.
RELATED Blog
comments