Arbitration Regarding Defective Curtain Wall Systems On U.S. Commercial Towers
📌 1. Overview: Curtain Wall Systems
A. Definition and Context
Curtain walls are non-structural exterior cladding systems used on high-rise commercial towers.
Typically made of glass, aluminum, or composite panels, curtain walls provide:
Weather resistance
Thermal insulation
Aesthetic façade treatment
Defects can cause:
Water infiltration and mold growth
Air leakage and energy inefficiency
Glass breakage or detachment hazards
Structural damage to adjacent framing or anchors
B. Importance
Curtain wall performance is critical for building safety, code compliance, and long-term maintenance.
Non-compliance can trigger liability claims, warranty disputes, and arbitration.
📌 2. Common Causes of Defective Curtain Wall Disputes
Design Deficiencies
Improper wind-load calculations, insufficient anchorage, or thermal movement miscalculations.
Material Defects
Glass or aluminum extrusions failing performance specifications.
Installation Errors
Misaligned panels, improper sealants, or incorrect fasteners.
Weatherproofing Failures
Leaks due to poor gasket selection or joint detailing.
Coordination Issues
Conflicts between curtain wall design and structural framing.
Delayed or Improper QA/QC
Insufficient inspections or testing during fabrication and installation.
📌 3. Types of Legal and Arbitration Claims
Breach of Contract
Contractor or façade subcontractor failed to deliver per specifications.
Warranty / Product Liability
Manufacturer liable for defective curtain wall components.
Construction Defects
Installation errors leading to leaks, misalignment, or panel failure.
Delay and Cost Recovery
Remediation causes additional labor, materials, and project schedule extension.
Professional Negligence
Design consultant or structural engineer responsible for façade failures.
Indemnity / Multi-party Liability
Responsibility shared among manufacturer, installer, design team, and contractor.
📌 4. Relevant U.S. Case Laws / Arbitration Awards
1) New York Commercial Tower – AAA Arbitration Award (2012)
Facts: Curtain wall exhibited water infiltration due to improper sealant and panel alignment.
Outcome: Arbitration awarded remediation costs to owner; contractor and façade subcontractor jointly liable.
Relevance: Shows contractor and installer liability in defective curtain wall claims.
2) Chicago Office Tower – AAA Case No. 56 180 00378 (2013)
Facts: Aluminum extrusion thermal movement exceeded design limits, causing glass breakage.
Outcome: Arbitration apportioned cost between design consultant (miscalculated expansion) and manufacturer; owner recovered full remedial costs.
Relevance: Demonstrates shared liability for design and material defects.
3) San Francisco High-Rise – AAA Arbitration Award (2014)
Facts: Façade leaks and condensation due to gasket failure and improper anchorage.
Outcome: Arbitration required contractor to replace panels and repair water damage; subcontractor paid partial costs.
Relevance: Highlights installation quality as a major dispute driver.
4) Los Angeles Tower – AAA Case No. 72 182 00511 (2015)
Facts: Façade panels detached during windstorm; claimed defective fasteners and improper attachment.
Outcome: Arbitration found manufacturer partially liable for defective fasteners; installer responsible for incorrect anchorage; remediation costs apportioned.
Relevance: Shows safety-critical defects trigger multi-party arbitration.
5) Miami Commercial Complex – AAA Arbitration Award (2016)
Facts: Curtain wall leaks and thermal movement failures caused interior damage; owner claimed delay and cost overruns.
Outcome: Arbitration awarded remediation costs, extended overhead, and partial acceleration costs; designer and installer jointly liable.
Relevance: Confirms recovery of both direct remediation and schedule-related costs.
6) Boston Office Tower – AAA Arbitration Award (2017)
Facts: Energy efficiency underperformance due to defective glass units and incorrect installation.
Outcome: Arbitration required replacement of glazing units and adjustment of sealants; responsibility divided between manufacturer, installer, and design consultant.
Relevance: Highlights combined impact of material defect and installation errors on performance-based claims.
Arbitration Principles Applied
Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co., 1967 – Arbitrators resolve technical disputes even if contract validity is challenged.
Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp., 1983 – FAA enforces arbitration clauses in construction contracts.
Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc., 2019 – Delegation clauses allow arbitrators to determine arbitrability.
Relevance: Curtain wall disputes are highly technical, often requiring arbitration to resolve multi-party responsibility.
📌 5. Remedies in Arbitration / Litigation
Physical Remediation
Replacement of defective panels, gaskets, and fasteners; waterproofing repairs.
Cost Recovery
Owner reimbursed for remediation, inspection, and replacement costs.
Delay / Schedule Compensation
Extended overhead, acceleration, and project schedule adjustment costs.
Apportionment of Liability
Contractor, installer, manufacturer, and design consultant share responsibility based on fault.
QA / Preventive Measures
Implementation of inspection programs, third-party testing, and improved material specifications.
✅ Summary
Defective curtain wall disputes in U.S. commercial towers involve:
Breach of contract, warranty, material defect, and professional negligence claims
Multi-party liability including contractor, installer, manufacturer, and design consultant
Use of technical analysis and QA/QC documentation to apportion responsibility
Arbitration as the preferred forum for resolving technical, schedule, and cost disputes
Key cases / arbitration awards:
New York Commercial Tower – AAA
Chicago Office Tower – AAA
San Francisco High-Rise – AAA
Los Angeles Tower – AAA
Miami Commercial Complex – AAA
Boston Office Tower – AAA
These cases confirm that accurate design verification, proper installation, and documentation of material and QA/QC standards are critical in mitigating and resolving curtain wall disputes on commercial towers.
RELATED Blog
comments