The plaintiff subcontractor claimed payment for extras on a watermain project, while the defendant general contractor counterclaimed for backcharges.
The court applied the Goldsmith test to determine whether the claimed extras were within the scope of the subcontract.
The court dismissed the claims for remobilization, flood damage, sludge removal, and re-inspection, finding them either unproven or within the contract's scope.
However, the court awarded the subcontractor $39,179.71 for additional hand lining required due to an unforeseen change in the tunnel's slope.
The general contractor's counterclaim for backcharges was dismissed for lack of proof.