Design risk under FIDIC contracts: Navigating responsibilities and liabilities
Introduction The allocation of design risk is an important consideration
1999 Suite: Commentary on Clause 02 – The Employer
Clause 2 outlines key Employer obligations, including access rights, assistance with permits, and financial arrangements. Additional obligations include payment (Sub-Clause 14.7) and taking over the Works (Sub-Clause 10.1). Employer claims require notice and compliance with Sub-Clause 2.5.
The Dangers of Employer Set Off in your FIDIC Contract: Suspension and Termination
If an Employer sets off certified but unpaid sums without following Sub-Clause 2.5, it may breach contract terms under FIDIC 1999. This article explores whether Employers can bypass the Engineer’s role and why the clause’s wording is crucial to both Contractors and Employers.
FIDIC Sub-Clause 20.5 – A Condition Precedent to Arbitration
The 1999 FIDIC forms of contract contain a number of
2017 Suite: Commentary on Clause 01.15 – Limitation of Liability
Clause 1.15, previously in Sub-Clause 17.6 (1999 Edition), is now separated from Risk and Responsibility. It exempts parties from liability for loss, including loss of use, profit, or contracts, with exceptions for certain sub-clauses, notably Sub-Clauses 8.8 and 13.3.1(c).
2017 Suite: Commentary on Clause 14 -Contract Price and Payment
Clause 14 outlines payment, certificates, and release from liability. While the methodology remains unchanged, procedural adjustments may delay payments but aim for prompt claim resolution. Some changes benefit contractors: e.g. claims are addressed during or shortly after the contract period.
2017 Suite: Commentary on Clause 13 – Variations and Adjustments
Clause 13 clarifies the Engineer’s power to vary, allowing contractors to object to unforeseeable variations. Significant limitations include objections for health, safety, and environmental impacts. Variations must align with Employer’s Requirements, and supplemental agreements may be needed for significant changes.
2017 Suite: Commentary on Clause 11 – Defects After Taking Over
Clause 11 has been clarified, with detailed provisions for notices and periods, DNP for Parts, and clearer time limits. Changes include risk allocation, compensation for denied access, and limited liability for Plant damage. Some cross-references may cause confusion.
1999 Suite: Commentary on Clause 16 – Suspension and Termination by Contractor
Clause 16 addresses suspension and termination by the Contractor, including rights to suspend work, grounds for termination, cessation of work, and payment on termination. It specifies notice periods, conditions for immediate termination, and entitlements following termination.
1999 Suite: Commentary on Clause 12 – Measurement and Evaluation
FIDIC 1999 is a re-measurement contract, with the Employer bearing the risk of quantity variations. Clause 12 covers measurement, evaluation of rates, and valuation of omissions. It lacks a standard measurement method, which has been criticized.
1999 Suite: Commentary on Clause 09 – Tests on Completion
Clause 9 covers Tests on Completion, requiring the Contractor to give notice when ready to carry out Tests on Completion, addressing delays by either party, retesting after failure, and handling failures to meet contract requirements after retesting.
1999 Suite: Commentary on Clause 04 – The Contractor
Clause 4 of the FIDIC Red Book 1999 consolidates various Contractor obligations, covering 24 topics. It includes general duties and references other significant obligations scattered throughout the Contract, such as communications, assignment, document care, compliance with laws, and time for completion.
2017 Suite: Commentary on Clause 05 – Design
Clause 5 changes include specifying designer qualifications, moving part of Sub-Clause 5.1 to 1.9, changing "approval" to "No-objection" in Sub-Clause 5.2, and introducing a new procedure for addressing design errors in Sub-Clause 5.8.
Are ‘binding’ DAB decisions enforceable?
Opinions on enforcing 'binding' DAB decisions vary. Some arbitrators support enforcement, while others, including the Singapore Court of Appeal, oppose it. This article considers case law addressing both sides of the argument and the issues that they raise.
FIDIC’S procedures for the appointment of a DAB need improvement
If the parties to a FIDIC contract cannot agree on
FIDIC 2022 Reprints: 10 Key Areas Of Change In The FIDIC Red Book 2017
FIDIC ‘launched’ the FIDIC 2022 reprints at the FIDIC International Construction Users’ Conference 2022, in London. The reception to the changes was mixed – some embraced the clarity; others questioned the significance and cost. This article draws your attention to 10 of the key areas of change in respect of the FIDIC Red Book 2017 including the definition of Claim, matters to be agreed or determined, the definition of Dispute and Exceptional Events.
1999 Suite: Commentary on Clause 13.8 – Variations: Adjustments for Changes in Cost
Employers avoid paying more under existing contracts, but forcing unprofitable work risks contractor insolvency. Contractors now seek protection from price fluctuations, preferring short projects or cost-plus letters of intent. Cost adjustment mechanisms, like FIDIC 1999 Sub-Clause 13.8, may help.
Price escalation and FIDIC: is Force Majeure an answer?
Could provisions in FIDIC contracts giving relief for ‘Force Majeure’ or ‘Exceptional Events’ provide relief to contractors suffering as a result of price escalation? It is well documented that construction and engineering projects around the globe are being affected by extreme and sometimes unprecedented price escalation. This is for many reasons including the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russo-Ukrainian conflict.
Covid-19 and FIDIC contracts – what protections and entitlements?
Covid-19 has had huge consequences around the world and unfortunately
FIDIC’S Golden Principles – holding back the tide?
FIDIC is concerned about its image. It says that heavily amending the FIDIC forms of contract impacts upon the FIDIC brand and that this is damaging FIDIC’s reputation. It seeks to address this with the introduction of five Golden Principles. But the Golden Principles are merely aspirational; they are not binding and have no contractual effect. Does this render them a pointless gesture ‘trying to hold back the tide’?