Tt was brought to the attention of the court, however, that the plaintiff had continued work upon the plant as long as was possible and that he had completed approximately two thirds of work provided for in the contract. Dr. Albini stated that although Mr. Suen Tao, supervising engineer, had told the court that fùrther portions of the water treatment plant and two water towers could have been constructed without the use of pipes, the true fact of the matter was that such work would have been inferior to that done with proper materials, and therefore the contractor, with the interests of his employers at heart, could not be held responsible for not finishing the plant by employing inferior methods and materials for construction.
Concerning the defendants' charges that the itemized account of expenses presented to the court for work and materials used in the construction of the plant was too high, counsel for the plaintiff told the court that even if such allegations were true, it would not be relevant to the case. Drawing attention to the fact that the plaintiff had actually finished about two thirds of the work contracted for, Dr. Albini stated that Mr. Pean was therefore entitled to two thirds of the price for entire construction as provided for in the contract, and that an itemized account of actual expenses for the court's deci fault could be ascribed to the plaintiff which would breach the contract.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.