George E. Rahn
George E. Rahn, Jr.
Primary Office
Experience

Construction Matters

  • Represented an international EPC contractor before the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce in a case arising out of the construction of a power plant in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The hearings took place in Paris and Saudi Arabia. The contractor provided the engineering services for the project and issues in the case involved claims for termination of the contract, changes to the work, delay and inefficiency damages, and contract interpretation.
  • Represented the owner and general contractor for a co-generation facility in a case that arose from the construction of a power plant in Reading, Pennsylvania. The opposing party was a mechanical contractor involved with the installation of piping for the power plant. Each party asserted claims against the other. The case was tried in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and involved an appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The case involved contract formation and interpretation, issues of scheduling and claims for delay and inefficiency damages. 
  • Represented a general contractor before the International Chamber of Commerce Court of Arbitration in several cases arising out of the construction of a steel mill in Ostrava, Czech Republic. One case involved various claims by the major subcontractor that supplied the steel rolling mill, and counterclaims by the general contractor. These involved claims of delays and claims for contract changes and disputes regarding completion. A second arbitration involved the owner of the steel mill and again involved claims and counterclaims. The issues involved the terms of final completion and claims for extra work and changes to the contract. The arbitration and hearing both took place in Vienna.
  • Represented an international EPC firm in a case involving an agency relationship in Qatar. The case was brought by the Qatari agent in the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce. The agent alleged that it was entitled to additional commissions for projects allegedly performed by the contractor in Qatar. The arbitration took place in Paris. There were issues regarding the relationship between the parties, contract terms, work performed, projects performed and contract interpretation.
  • Represented a general contractor that had a contract with PennDOT in a dispute arising out of the major reconstruction of the Schuylkill Expressway in Philadelphia. The case was brought by a subcontractor for delay damages. The case went to trial in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County.
  • Represented a road contractor based in Turkey in a case involving construction of an asphalt road in Kazakhstan. The case was against an engineer hired to determine the proper formula for the asphalt. The environment involved extreme heat and cold, and the asphalt did not perform as required.
  • Represented the general contractor in a case involving the construction of Woodcrest Station for the Patco High Speed line in New Jersey. The case involved construction of bridges, roadways and ramps on Route 295 and the New Jersey Turnpike. The plaintiff was a steel supplier. The case went to trial in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.
  • Represented the general contractor in a case involving the construction of a wastewater pumping station for the Cape May County Utilities Authority. The defendant was the CMCUA.
  • Represented the general contractor in a case against Cape May County Utilities Authority that involved construction of a wastewater treatment plant in Cape May, New Jersey.
  • Represented the property owner and operator of a mining site in a dispute over the valuation of the mining site that arose during a condemnation proceeding. The case was against the South Jersey Transportation Authority, which took the property for a waste treatment facility.
  • Represented a general contractor involved in a flood control project in Hamilton Township, New Jersey. The defendant was the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The government terminated the contractor, and the contractor contested the termination. The contractor built a concrete culvert for flood control. The case went to trial before the U.S. Claims Court and involved an appeal to the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.