Unlike compensation, contribution is a principle of shared responsibility. However, despite the blind way in which he is sometimes precarious, this does not come into play simply because there are several accused. In most states, the contribution entitlement is codified by the adoption of a version of the Uniform Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasors Act.6 Joint tortfeasors are two or more persons who are jointly and severally liable for the same violation of persons or their property.7 If two or more parties are jointly and severally liable, each is responsible for the full extent of the violations resulting from their actions. Under these conditions, the party before whom they are held liable may render the entire judgment of each of the defendants. The contribution is the means by which the paying defendant holds the other defendant liable for his or her fair share. Exemption from contribution room of other senior managers. [PART A] exempts [PART B] from contribution room against [PARTY B] by other senior officers, directors or employees of [PARTY A] who may be held liable jointly with [PARTY B]. A party seeking appropriate compensation must demonstrate that it is completely innocent and that the party from whom it seeks damages is legally liable for the alleged harm. Adequate compensation is an all-or-nothing proposition, both in damages and in damages.4 When determining whether a party is entitled to compensation, the courts do not weigh the relative fault of the parties to determine which one is “liable”.
If both parties are at fault in any way, recovery of compensation under the Common Law is excluded.5 The contribution clause of a compensation agreement specifies when the company must contribute to the losses suffered by the compensation, including the nature of the proceedings in which a contribution is required and the amount of the contribution. In the absence of joint and several liability and in the absence of contribution rights, the damage cannot be allocated among subcontractors as a percentage of the debt or other similar concepts of co-liability. Even if the contractor is responsible for the overall performance of all its subcontractors, each subcontractor is only responsible for its share of the work. Therefore, the contractor who wishes to require its subcontractors to request a reiteration must provide evidence of the breach of its contract by any subcontractor and the resulting damage. This means that it will be precisely identified the parts of the work that did not meet the contractual requirements in force, the subcontractor responsible for the performance of this work and the cost of repairing the defective work. However, the concepts of joint and several liability and contribution do not apply in most cases of construction failure, since the core of the doctrine of recourse and the rule of economic damage excludes that the various subcontractors are held liable as co-engaging acts. The substance of the doctrine of the remedy prevents the parties from transforming claims for infringement into claims for negligence. If the obligations of the parties are contractual – as is almost always the case in construction – it is the contract, not the right of infringement, that defines their respective rights and obligations. Similarly, the economic damage rule excludes the right to negligence where the only losses suffered are “economic”, including the costs of repairing or repairing defective work. In the absence of bodily injury or property damage, the rights and obligations of the parties are determined by a contract and not by an unlawful act.
The contractual exemption is, at least theoretically, a matter of negotiation….