Expert Witness Journal Issue 68 August 2026 - Flipbook - Page 27
as the adhesive alone could not be relied upon to
secure sheets to the GFRP panels.
The “approved” panel module size resulted in panels
signi昀椀cantly larger than the 9x2.2m units on which
the façade sub-contractor had based its price, with
the sub-contractor alleging that over 70% of the
panels exceeded this size. This not only required a
greater volume of foam to create the moulds for the
GFRP panels, but also necessitated changes to the
fabrication and production processes.
A letter of intent (LOI) was issued to the façade subcontractor within which is stated:
“
All quali昀椀cations, exclusions, clari昀椀cations, etc.
stated within the subcontractors quotation shall be
deemed withdrawn and shall not form part of this
Letter of Intent…”
Following the production of visual mock ups, the
proposed use of rivets to mechanically 昀椀x the
stainless-steel sheets was rejected. Instead, welded
studs were introduced. These studs had to be welded
to the back of the stainless-steel sheets in a manner
that avoided any burn marks on the visible face. This
added a further production step to ensure precise
alignment with corresponding holes in the GFRP
panels.
Attached to the LOI was a list of issued forconstruction drawings and documents. The content
of these was identical to the tender documents; they
had not been updated to re昀氀ect the façade subcontractors tender proposal.
The façade sub-contractors contract included that
“The Sub-contractor is to allow for all design changes of a
minor nature.”
In addition, vertical hairline joints between the
stainless-steel sheets bonded to the GFRP panels
were rejected, with full length sheets across the
width of the panels requested to mitigate the need
for vertical joints between the stainless-steel sheets.
Post contract, the client and consultant team
requested that a number of alternative panel
module options be developed. It was submitted
that this went beyond simply assisting with the
昀椀nalisation of the design, and instead removed the
façade sub-contractor’s contractual right to develop
its own preferred module size, as stated in its tender
proposal.
The increased panel size and curvature also created
di昀케culties in bending the stainless-steel sheets
to match the panels. To overcome this, a hexagon
scoring pattern was introduced which involved laser
cutting slots in the stainless-steel sheets to improve
Figure 2. The hexagon pattern in the stainless steel sheets
EXPERT WITNESS JOURNAL
25
AUGUST 2026
