Bonding procedures for North American and international construction contracts

Janaka Y. Ruwanpura, Samuel Ariaratnam, Barry K. Peters

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Surety bonding has become essential in today's construction market. The industry is complex, and contractors face high expectations for contract performance. The global construction market and the chance to learn from others justify discussing general bonding procedures and comparing North American and international construction bonding. The main difference is in the type of bonding; the North American construction industry uses an obligatory type rather than the forfeiture type commonly used internationally. Further, there are noticeable differences in bond amounts due to the type of bonding. The procedures used by North American sureties in issuing bonds are more rigid as the surety assumes the entire responsibility of the contract completion whereas bonds are considered an extension of the contractor's line of credit in international contracts. The common law implications, surety requirements, premiums, and other concerns are detailed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)28-34
Number of pages7
JournalEMJ - Engineering Management Journal
Volume11
Issue number2
StatePublished - 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Contractors
Construction industry
Industry

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering

Cite this

Bonding procedures for North American and international construction contracts. / Ruwanpura, Janaka Y.; Ariaratnam, Samuel; Peters, Barry K.

In: EMJ - Engineering Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, 1999, p. 28-34.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{769a756755ed47fc9f1df4dd67593de9,
title = "Bonding procedures for North American and international construction contracts",
abstract = "Surety bonding has become essential in today's construction market. The industry is complex, and contractors face high expectations for contract performance. The global construction market and the chance to learn from others justify discussing general bonding procedures and comparing North American and international construction bonding. The main difference is in the type of bonding; the North American construction industry uses an obligatory type rather than the forfeiture type commonly used internationally. Further, there are noticeable differences in bond amounts due to the type of bonding. The procedures used by North American sureties in issuing bonds are more rigid as the surety assumes the entire responsibility of the contract completion whereas bonds are considered an extension of the contractor's line of credit in international contracts. The common law implications, surety requirements, premiums, and other concerns are detailed.",
author = "Ruwanpura, {Janaka Y.} and Samuel Ariaratnam and Peters, {Barry K.}",
year = "1999",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "28--34",
journal = "EMJ - Engineering Management Journal",
issn = "1042-9247",
publisher = "American Society for Engineering Management",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bonding procedures for North American and international construction contracts

AU - Ruwanpura, Janaka Y.

AU - Ariaratnam, Samuel

AU - Peters, Barry K.

PY - 1999

Y1 - 1999

N2 - Surety bonding has become essential in today's construction market. The industry is complex, and contractors face high expectations for contract performance. The global construction market and the chance to learn from others justify discussing general bonding procedures and comparing North American and international construction bonding. The main difference is in the type of bonding; the North American construction industry uses an obligatory type rather than the forfeiture type commonly used internationally. Further, there are noticeable differences in bond amounts due to the type of bonding. The procedures used by North American sureties in issuing bonds are more rigid as the surety assumes the entire responsibility of the contract completion whereas bonds are considered an extension of the contractor's line of credit in international contracts. The common law implications, surety requirements, premiums, and other concerns are detailed.

AB - Surety bonding has become essential in today's construction market. The industry is complex, and contractors face high expectations for contract performance. The global construction market and the chance to learn from others justify discussing general bonding procedures and comparing North American and international construction bonding. The main difference is in the type of bonding; the North American construction industry uses an obligatory type rather than the forfeiture type commonly used internationally. Further, there are noticeable differences in bond amounts due to the type of bonding. The procedures used by North American sureties in issuing bonds are more rigid as the surety assumes the entire responsibility of the contract completion whereas bonds are considered an extension of the contractor's line of credit in international contracts. The common law implications, surety requirements, premiums, and other concerns are detailed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032662518&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032662518&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0032662518

VL - 11

SP - 28

EP - 34

JO - EMJ - Engineering Management Journal

JF - EMJ - Engineering Management Journal

SN - 1042-9247

IS - 2

ER -