Question

Milton is offered a contract by Marcos and Co. to design condos for a fourteen-story structure. After the condos are completed, Marcos and Co. finds that instead of two cupboards, all the condos have only one cupboard. The error is traced back to Milton's faulty design. The error notwithstanding, the condos are still in absolutely usable condition. What is Milton's liability?

1) Milton has to reimburse the client for any extra money spent to fit in an extra cupboard.
2) Milton has to pay Marcos and Co. the difference between the market value of the building as it stands and the market value of the intended structure.
3) Milton has to pay the tenants the cost for fitting in an extra cupboard.
4) Milton has to pay the state a fine for the inconvenience caused to the tenants.

Answer 1

Milton's liability would likely be to reimburse the client for the extra expense of adding the missing cupboards, which is option 1. Options 2, 3, and 4 are less likely, and the exact liability would depend on the contract terms and local laws.

Step-by-step explanation:

Milton's liability for the error made in the design of the condos with only one cupboard instead of two would depend on the terms of the contract he signed with Marcos and Co. and the legal principles applicable to such professional errors in the jurisdiction where the building is located. Typically, architects or designers could be responsible for the cost to correct the error or for any resulting damages due to their professional negligence or breach of contract. If the condos are still usable, Milton might be liable for the cost to rectify the mistake, which could be option 1: Milton has to reimburse the client for any extra money spent to fit in an extra cupboard. Option 2 suggests Milton pays the difference in market value, which might not be applicable if the sole issue is the cupboard and the condos are otherwise perfect. Option 3 is less likely since the contract with the tenants is usually Marcos and Co.’s responsibility, not Milton’s unless such responsibility was specifically transferred to him in the contract. Option 4 is also less likely unless there was a legal statute violated causing the state to impose a fine. Legal advice should be sought to determine the exact liability.