A. Disclaimers of Express and Implied Warranties.
Some jurisdictions imply professional warranties, and almost all jurisdictions allow express warranties. The prudent draftsman of an architect-oriented contract will attempt todisclaim them. A proposed clause might read as follows:
12.4. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES. Architect does not warrant or guarantee any particular result from its services and specifically disclaims any warranties, express or implied, which may arise by statute, common law, or equity. The excluded warranties include, but are not limited to, any implied warranty that work or professional services will be performed in a good and workmanlike manner, or any express warranty, written or oral, regarding either its services or the suitability of any of the Contract Documents.
A. Eliminating Claimants
1 Third-Party Beneficiaries
Paragraph 9.7 of the AIA B141 contains a clause eliminating third-party beneficiaries, and the AIA General Conditions ¶1.1.2 repeats it. These are intended primarily to avoid the existence of any contractual relationship between the contractor and the Architect, without which the contractor has no contractual claim against the Architect. See, Bernard Johnson, Inc. v. Continental Constructors, Inc., 630 S.W.2d 365 (Tex.App.--Austin, 1982, no writ).
2 Subrogated Insurors
A common form of troublesome claims arising out of a construction process are those of subrogated insurors, whose decision to sue is made by a person completely remote from the construction process, much less the construction team. The Architect should attempt to eliminate these claims by obtaining the agreement of the Owner -- and, through the Owner, the contractor -- to waive the subrogation rights of their insurors. ¶11.3.7 of the General Conditions is a successful attempt to do this, see Temple Eastex, Inc. v. Old Orchard Creek Partners, Ltd., 848 S.W.2d 724, 729 (Tex.App.--Dallas, 1992, writ denied). The AIA Owner/Architect Agreement, ¶9.4 does so, as well, but in a clause which is not conspicuous, andwhich does not require the agreement of the insurance companies to the waiver. (Whether the insurance companies’ agreement is required may be an open question under Texas law. See, Seamless Floors v. Value Line Homes, Inc., 438 S.W.2d 598, 601-02 (Tex.App.--Ft. Worth, 1969, writ ref’d n.r.e.)). In order to remedy these potential problems, the Owner/Architect Agreement should contain a clause similar to the following:
Some jurisdictions imply professional warranties, and almost all jurisdictions allow express warranties. The prudent draftsman of an architect-oriented contract will attempt to disclaim them. A proposed clause might read as follows:
A 明示和暗示担保的否认
某些司法权暗示专业的担保，而几乎所有司法权都允许明示担保。一份面向建筑师的合同的审慎起草将试图否认他们。一条推荐的条款可以读出如下：
12.4. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES.
12.4 担保的否认
Architect does not warrant or guarantee any particular result from its services and specifically disclaims any warranties, express or implied, which may arise by statute, common law, or equity. The excluded warranties include, but are not limited to, any implied warranty that work or professional services will be performed in a good and workmanlike manner, or any express warranty, written or oral, regarding either its services or the suitability of any of the Contract Documents. 建筑师不担保或保证源自自己服务的任何特定的结果，而且特别否认任何可能由法令、普通法或权益而产生的、明示的或暗示的担保。排除的担保包括，但不限于有关于其服务或任何合同文件的适用性的任何暗示的担保（工作或专业服务将以良好而熟练的方式履行的担保），或任何明示的担保，不管是书面的还是口头的。
A. Eliminating Claimants
消除索赔
1 Third-Party Beneficiaries
1第三方受益者
Paragraph 9.7 of the AIA B141 contains a clause eliminating third-party beneficiaries, and the AIA General Conditions ¶1.1.2 repeats it. These are intended primarily to avoid the existence of any contractual relationship between the contractor and the Architect, without which the contractor has no contractual claim against the Architect. See, Bernard Johnson, Inc. v. Continental Constructors, Inc., 630 S.W.2d 365 (Tex.App.--Austin, 1982, no writ).
AIA B141文件的9.7段落包含一项消除第三方受益者的条款，而AIA“一般条件”1.1.2条款重复了此条款。这些主要旨在避免在承包商和建筑师之间存在任何合同的关系，没有它，承包商对建筑师就没有合同性的索赔。参见Bernard Johnson, Inc. 公司对大陆建筑商公司的案例630 S.W.2d 365 (Tex.App.--Austin, 1982, 无法院命令)
2 Subrogated Insurors
2 代位保险人（公司）
A common form of troublesome claims arising out of a construction process are those of subrogated insurors, whose decision to sue is made by a person completely remote from the construction process, much less the construction team. 由施工过程产生的、有点麻烦的索赔常见的形式是代位保险人的索赔，它们起诉的决定是由一个远离施工过程的个人做出的，很少是由施工团队做出的。The Architect should attempt to eliminate these claims by obtaining the agreement of the Owner -- and, through the Owner, the contractor -- to waive the subrogation rights of their insurors. 建筑师应试图通过得到业主的同意，并通过业主得到承包商的同意而取消这些索赔，以放弃他们保险人的代位权。¶11.3.7 of the General Conditions is a successful attempt to do this, see Temple Eastex, Inc. v. Old Orchard Creek Partners, Ltd., 848 S.W.2d 724, 729 (Tex.App.--Dallas, 1992, writ denied). AIA“一般条件”的11.3.7条款是这样做的成功尝试，参见Temple Eastex, Inc. 公司对Old Orchard Creek Partners, Ltd.,公司的案例， 848 S.W.2d 724, 729 (Tex.App.--Dallas, 1992, 法院命令被否定)。The AIA Owner/Architect Agreement, ¶9.4 does so, as well, but in a clause which is not conspicuous, andwhich does not require the agreement of the insurance companies to the waiver. (Whether the insurance companies’ agreement is required may be an open question under Texas law. See, Seamless Floors v. Value Line Homes, Inc., 438 S.W.2d 598, 601-02 (Tex.App.--Ft. Worth, 1969, writ ref’d n.r.e.)). In order to remedy these potential problems, the Owner/Architect Agreement should contain a clause similar to the following:
AIA的业主/建筑师协议9.4条款也这样做，不过是在一条不醒目的、不要求保险公司同意放弃权利的条款中。（在得克萨斯的法律下，是否要求保险公司的同意可能是一个开放的问题。参见Seamless Floors 公司对Value Line Homes, Inc., 公司的案例，438 S.W.2d 598, 601-02 (Tex.App.--Ft. Worth, 1969, writ ref’d n.r.e.)).。为了补救这些潜在的问题，业主/建筑师协议应包含一条类似于以下的条款：
一些辖区暗示的担保,而且几乎所有专业允许表达保证司法。精明的工匠的合同将architect-oriented todisclaim他们。拟议条款会读到如下:
12.4。保证免责条款。建筑师不保证或担保任何特定的结果来自它的服务和明确放弃任何明示或暗示的保证,而产生的法令规定,普通法,或权益。被保证的,包括但不限于任何默示保证工作或专业服务将在一个好的和漂亮的方式,或任何明示保证、书面的或口头的,对于其服务或合适的合同文件。
答:消除索取
1第三方的受益者
段落的AIA B141仍含有一个条款,消除第三方的受益人,AIA一般条件¶1.1.2重演。这些都是为了避免任何合同的存在之间的关系,而与建筑师承包商承包商没有合同索赔的建筑师。伯纳德·约翰逊,看大陆构造器,公司、弧菌630 S.W.2d 365(Tex.App.——奥斯汀,1982年,没有写)。
2 Insurors免责
一个常见的麻烦索赔的施工过程中,对于那些insurors的决定是由一个人起诉完全远离施工工艺、施工队伍少得多。建筑师应该试图消除这些主张通过获得一致的业主,通过业主、承包商——放弃他们的insurors代位权的。¶11.3.7的一般情况是一个成功的尝试,看寺庙Eastex公司诉老果园溪合伙人公司、90 S.W.2d 724,729(Tex.App.——达拉斯,1992,写否认)。AIA业主/建筑师协议,¶9.4这么做了,但在一个条款,并不引人注目,andwhich并不需要的协议,保险公司的弃权。(是否需要的协议,保险公司可以在德克萨斯州一悬而未决的问题。看,无缝地板v值线S.W.2d家公司、2 - 2(601 598,Tex.App.——英国《金融时报》。参考价值,1969年就n.r.e文书。)。为了弥补这些潜在的问题,业主/建筑师协议条款应包含类似于下列事项:
有些法域意味着专业保证，几乎所有的法域允许明示的保证。审慎草拟的建筑师为导向的合同将尝试todisclaim他们。拟议的条款可能如下：
4月12日。免责声明。建筑师不担保或保证任何特定的结果，特别是它的服务不承担任何担保，明示或暗示，可能出现的章程，普通法，衡平法，或股本。被排除在外的担保包括但不限于任何隐含保证或专业服务工作将在一个良好的和熟练的方式，或任何明示保证，书面或口头的，或者其有关服务或适宜的任何合同文件。
答：消除索赔
1第三方受益人
第9.7友邦B141载有一项条款，消除第三方受益人，和友邦的一般条件¶ 1.1.2重复它。这些主要是为了避免存在任何合同关系的承包商和建筑师，没有承包合同索赔没有对建筑师。见，伯纳德约翰逊公司诉大陆构造公司， 630 SW2d 365 （ Tex.App .--奥斯汀， 1982年，没有令状） 。
2代责任
一种普遍的麻烦引起的索赔的施工过程中的代位insurors ，他决定起诉是由一个人完全远离施工过程，更是施工队伍。建筑师应设法消除这些索赔获得的同意，业主- ，并通过业主，承包商-放弃代位权的insurors 。 ¶ 11.3.7的一般条件是一个成功的尝试这样做，见寺Eastex ，公司诉老果园溪伙伴有限公司， 848 SW2d 724 ， 729 （ Tex.App .--达拉斯， 1992年，令状否认） 。友邦所有者/建筑师协定¶ 4月9日这样做，以及，但在该条款不显眼， andwhich不需要的同意，保险公司放弃。 （不论是保险公司的协议可能会需要一个开放的问题得克萨斯州的法律。查看，无缝地板价值线五家公司， 438 SW2d 598 ， 601-02 （ Tex.App .--英尺。沃思1969年，令状ref'd非重复性工程费用） ） 。为了纠正这些潜在的问题，业主/建筑师协定应包括一项条款，类似如下：
