POWER UNITS.

Gisborne Times, Volume LXVIII, Issue 10728, 27 October 1928, Page 2

POWER UNITS.

TAKING OVER OF PORTION Ob

NEW PLANT

BOARD AND CONTRACTORS

A suggestion from Metropolitan Vickers Electrical Coy., Ltd., the contractors for the new engines installed in the power house, that, the Power Board should take over certain portions of the new plant that had proved satisfactory was not accepted by the Board yesterday, on tlie advice of their solicitors.

The opinion of the solicitors stated •

“We have considered the Metropolitan Vickers Electrical Co.’s request, as set out in their letter of September 12 last, that the board should signify its agreement that the rotary converter, switch gear, and water-cooler are now deemed to Jiave been taken over. We have perused* the various documents which go to make the contract in this . matter. The basis of the contract between the hoard and the company is the specification. That specification includes, besides the two 500-h.p. engines, six separate items and certain accessories. The rotary converter, switch gear and water-cooler form three out of these six items. The contract subsequently entered into covers, of course, the' whole specification, and we can see nothing in the course of the subsequent dealing which separates any one item from the otners.

“The position, therefore, briefly put, is that the company has enteiod into one whole agreement with the board for the supply of various items of machinery, and is able to perform its contract only by supplying the whole of those items in good order and condition. It seems to us, therefore, that the board should not be called upon to consider any question in connection with any of the items set out in the specifications until the point of time has arisen when it can' be reasonably contended that the whole of those items have been supplied in good order and condition, in accordance with the terms of the contract. When that point of time has arisen, the board may then be reasonably called upon to say what items it objects to, and where the deficiencies lie, but until that time is reached, we think it would- be inadvisable for the board to express any view whatever upon some items only of the t-otal required to be supplied. “It is true that the company’s suggestion is made subject to the understanding that the taking over would be without prejudice to the rights of the Hoard in respect of the items not taken over. This, however, does not meet the > points we make: (1) That when a dispute is in existence, over certain items forming part of a whole contract, one party is not called on to make any binding admissions which subsequent events might prove to be unwise; anti (2) that the real question at issue is whether the contract as a whole has been performed, and that until one party is in the position to put forward that contention' with some degree of plausibility, the other party is not- called upon, or indeed in a* position, to consider the question at all. We therefore advise that no action should he taken.”