This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2006-09-12 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| This is incorrect. According to this Court in Arenas v. Court of Appeals,[41] Article 1724 contemplates disputes arising from increased costs of labor and materials. Article 1724 should, therefore, be read as to prohibit a contractor from perpetrating two acts: (1) withdrawing from the contract on account of the higher cost of the labor or materials; and (2) demanding an increase in the price on account of the higher cost of the labor or materials.[42] This focus on disputes arising from increased cost of labor and materials is even more evident when the origin of Article 1754 is reviewed. Article 1754 of the 1950 Civil Code is based on Article 1593[43] of the Spanish Civil Code, which states:Art. 1593. An architect or contractor who, for a lump sum, undertakes the construction of a building, or any other work to be done in accordance with a plan agreed upon with the owner of the ground, may not demand an increase of the price, even if the cost of the materials or labor has increased; but he may do so when any change increasing the work is made in the plans, provided the owner has given his consent thereto. Article 1593 of the Spanish Civil Code did not contain a similar prohibition against abandonment, and was entirely focused on its apparent objective to providing an exception to the rule that a contracting party cannot unilaterally amend (by increasing the contract price) the contract despite supervening circumstances. | |||||