Best endeavours v reasonable endeavours
Many construction industry practitioners will have been confronted with a contract which requires the parties to use 'best' or 'reasonable' endeavours in performing obligations under the contract. This apparently minor difference however presents a real risk to a party if they are unaware of the difference in legal interpretation between the two terms.
Evidently an obligation to use 'best endeavours' implies a higher degree of commitment to perform a particular task when compared to 'reasonable endeavours' but, as is often the case, it is only when a contract dispute arises and Court proceedings follow that the reality of the difference becomes apparent.
There are no clear definitions of these terms upon which reliance can be made but case law has held that best endeavours means, amongst other things:
- To leave no stone unturned.
- To do what is reasonably to be expected in the circumstances.
- Not to do anything that will jeopardise the commercial interests of the obligor.
An immediate and obvious difficulty is that the word “reasonably” appears in a definition of 'best' endeavours. Furthermore, case law has also used similar language in defining reasonable endeavours.
Behind these definitions lies an expectation of what might be done to ensure that these obligations are met.
In the case of best endeavours it may be the case that a party has to commit extra resources or spend additional funds in order to meet the obligation, even to the extent that it is commercially damaging to the party concerned. Where the obligation is reasonable it is unlikely that this degree of obligation would be applied by the Courts.
And when it comes to testing these definitions in Court a subjective approach is adopted for best endeavours whilst it is an objective one for reasonable endeavours.
For the purposes of the layman, however, one can point to certain more simple facts:
- Reasonable endeavours will be less onerous than best endeavours.
- If a contract sets out specific steps to be taken as part of a reasonable obligation, ensure that these steps are indeed carried out. This is regardless of commercial considerations.
This article was created by: --Martinc 14:11, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
 Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki
- Duty of care.
- Duty to warn.
- Fitness for purpose.
- Good faith.
- Good faith – good grief.
- Reasonable skill and care.
Featured articles and news
Sadiq Khan publishes a new development strategy for the capital.
In the week of the momentous Heathrow decision, we look back at the development and design of T5.
BSRIA’s flagship event will address performance and wellbeing beyond compliance.
Young Architects and Developers Alliance launched to build the relationship between the two disciplines.
BS 8536-2:2016 Design and construction: Code of practice for asset management (Linear and geographical infrastructure).
Paying for off-site goods or materials can be useful, but it puts the client at risk.
People power can be transformative if properly informed and inspired.
ZHA win competition to build an Urban Heritage Administration Centre in Saudi Arabia.
Leaps, not steps, are needed to avoid a ticking time bomb, say BRE in response to Farmer Review.
A multi-purpose hall in France covered in a translucent orange membrane.
Winning designs revealed for a rock formation-influenced residential complex in Rennes.
An article explaining the techniques, regulations and environmental impacts of carbon capture and storage.
Watch one of the first documentaries by the acclaimed Adam Curtis, examining the substandard system building of the 1960s.