UNIVERSITY OF MAURITIUS

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

SECOND SEMESTER EXAMINATIONS

MAY 2014

PROGRAMME MSc Building Services Engineering

MODULE NAME Legal Aspects of Building Services Engineering

DATE Saturday MODULE CODE MECH 6106

24 May 2014

TIME 09:30 – 12:45 Hrs DURATION 3 hours

(+ 15 Mins
Reading Time)

NO. OF 5 NO. OF QUESTIONS 4

QUESTIONS SET TO BE ATTEMPTED

INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES

There are 2 Sections in this paper: Section A and Section B.

Section A consists of 2 questions. BOTH Questions are compulsory.

Section B consists of 3 questions. Answer Any Two (2) questions from Section B.

All questions carry marks as indicated.

Building Control Act 2012 is provided and should be returned to the Invigilators after
the examination.
 LEGAL ASPECTS OF BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING – MECH 6106

SECTION A [Compulsory]

Answer ALL questions from this Section.

Question 1

As an expert Building Services Engineering service provider, you are approached by a

former client, Mr Alexander Bright, the promoter of a high rise building, SkyViews
Towers, constructed and completed under your supervision 3 years back and which has
since been used as office space for a number of multi-national firms. At the client’s
request, you had designed the building such that lifts would be the main way to move
up and down the building, by a centrally controlled electronic system located in the
basement.

The building is located at the corner of two adjacent roads and has high stone walls of
2.5m high on three sides, with the fourth side being bordered by a man-made water
course from an adjacent river. Following recent rains, the adjacent river, whose water
you obtained water rights to use as part of the landscape of the project, though it did not
flow on the promoter’s land, flooded its banks. Tenants claim that water entered into the
building damaging the installed furniture, electronic installations and carpets. This also
caused panic amongst the staff when the lifts stopped working on that day and some
staff members fell in the narrow staircases. As a result, the multi-nationals have had to
significantly reduce their activities for a few weeks and subsequently, they complained
of foul smell inside the building such that many of their employees are suffering from
nausea, causing them to be unable to perform their duties properly. The tenants feel
aggrieved by the situation and are now claiming damage against the owner for having
failed in his duty under the BCA 2012, with you as secondary respondent.

Meanwhile, you have entered into a joint venture with a foreign business man. The joint
venture intends to implant itself in Mauritius, along a secluded beach area, to produce
cement from its raw materials. The process involves churning large pieces of raw
materials into smaller finer particles through a series of rotating grinders, fuelled by a
boiler, while diesel is used to fuel the furnace required to produce a liquid snag which
will form the primary processed raw material. The process also requires the use of
chemicals in large quantities, which although not dangerous when inert, may explode if
mixed with Sodium Chloride (salt). The joint venture intends to store all materials on
site.

(a) Write a report to defend yourself of your likely liability in the SkyViews Towers
case. [10 marks]

(b) Advise the promoter Mr Alexander Bright on his likely liability. [10 marks]

(c) How would you proceed to set up your cement plant in Mauritius? Discuss in
detail the conditions to which you would need to abide.
[10 marks]

Question 2
Compare and contrast the merits of a Dispute Adjudication Board (DAB) with those of
traditional Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods and litigation.
[20 marks]
Page 1 of 3
 LEGAL ASPECTS OF BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING – MECH 6106

SECTION B

Answer Any Two (2) questions from this Section.

Question 3

Tom lives with his father Fred in the latter's house. Both father and son have agreed to
the construction of a bungalow on their co-owned land near the beach, following
discussion with Paul, Fred's best friend. Paul has agreed to pay for a half of the project
costs against a debt previously owed by him to Fred, with Tom providing the rest of the
financing. Fred consequently invited bids from local contractors for the works. 5 such
bidders submitted an offer, from which both Tom and Fred decided to award the works
to FastConstruct Ltd.

Meanwhile, both father and son realise that their house needs renovation, and feeling
confident with the bidding process, they again invite bids from local contractors. Tom
had previously told Fred “not to worry” and that he will “finance 90% of the renovation
works”. 4 such bids are received one of which is from FastConstruct Ltd, though it is the
highest priced offer. However, for ease of convenience, Fred decides to, and effectively
awards the renovation works to FastConstruct Ltd, and strikes a deal with its Director,
who agrees to do the work by doubling the amount payable on the construction project,
instead of charging separately for each project.

Halfway into the scheduled project duration for the construction works, Tom becomes
increasingly dissatisfied with the M&E works and informs Fred that he will no longer
contribute to the cost of the project. Following the heated ensuing discussion, Fred
orders Tom out of the house, which he refuses, claiming an interest therein, by virtue of
his contribution to the renovation costs. Paul also feels that the costs of the construction
works are now disproportionate with the amount of work done and wants to pull out of
the deal. Fred however gets angry with Paul and warns him that he will be liable for
breach of contract if he does so.

You have been approached, separately, by all the parties involved, to discuss their
contractual obligations. Advise each one of them.
[25 marks]

Question 4

Compare and contrast the “purposive approach” of legal interpretation with other
methods of legal interpretation. Illustrate your answer with reference to the Building
Control Act 2012.
[25 marks]

Page 2 of 3
 LEGAL ASPECTS OF BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING – MECH 6106

Question 5

One of the requirements in a local public procurement exercise was that bidders shall
submit a bid security instead of a bid securing declaration as part of their bid.
Additionally, prospective bidders were informed in the Instructions to Bidders that their
bid is to remain valid for 120 days, though the bid security should have a validity of 90
days.

During the bid evaluation exercise, the Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) was of the view
that Bidder A had not submitted his “list of equipments to be mobilized” and considered
same as a major deviation. As a result, the BEC was of the view that Bidder A’s bid
should be rejected outright. In the same process, BEC noted that Bidder B and Bidder C
are registered as local companies but had foreign directors and fully employ foreign
labour. Bidder D has not submitted the said Bid Security but a Bid Securing Declaration
and the BEC viewed this as a minor omission, and consequently requested Bidder D to
submit that document as part of the clarification process.

(a) Distinguish between bid securing declaration and bid security.

[5 marks]

(b) Explain, with reasoning, why you think the bid validity period and the validity of
the bid security differs.
[5 marks]

(c) What do you understand by “major deviation” and what would be its implication
on the Bid? Discuss the BEC’s decision.
[5 marks]

(d) Members of the BEC feel Bidder B and Bidder C are eligible for margin of
preference. Discuss the BEC’s opinion on the application of Margin of Preference.
[5 marks]

(e) What do you understand by “minor omission”? Discuss the BEC’s decision with
respect to Bidder D.
[5 marks]

END OF QUESTION PAPER

/ph

Page 3 of 3