FIDIC 2017 Archives - Corbett & Co.

FIDIC Changes in Legislation and Covid-19: Compelled by Law or Just Doing Your Job?

FIDIC Changes in Legislation and Covid-19: Compelled by Law or Just Doing Your Job?

Up until the spring of 2020, a FIDIC 1999 Sub-Clause 13.7 [Adjustments for Changes in Legislation][1] claim was just one of many issues to be resolved, for example, in a delay and disruption claim or a Cost claim. However, the focus it receives in the context of Covid-19 is drastically different. Many in the industry are using the changes in legislation provision to seek financial compensation in a situation that would otherwise potentially only attract an extension of time.[2] Awarding Cost for Covid-19 events regardless of the circumstances may seem to some (Contractors mostly, though there are Employers and Engineers who agree) like the appropriate thing to do, but whether it is correct according to the Contract is a different question.

By Gabriel Mulero Clas|September 23rd, 2021|Covid, Delay, featured, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off

FIDIC 2017 – A Practical Legal Guide – Errata

FIDIC 2017 – A Practical Legal Guide – Errata

Page Corrigenda 146 For provisions referring to sub-clause 3.7, see

By Susan Barrett|May 28th, 2021|Insights|Comments Off

Changing Tack

Changing Tack

A contract may require a party giving notice of a claim to specify the contractual or legal basis of that claim in the notice (or the supporting particulars). What if that party states a contractual or legal basis for the claim but later (perhaps with the benefit of additional information or because of advice from its lawyers) changes its mind or wants to include further contractual or legal bases? This was considered by the Hong Kong Court of Appeal in Maeda Corporation and China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Limited v Bauer Hong Kong Limited [2020] HKCA 830. It found that a subcontractor could not change the contractual basis for its claim once the time period for providing such notice had expired. What, if any, impact will this decision have on the FIDIC forms of contract?

By Victoria Tyson|May 7th, 2021|Arbitration, featured, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off

Unintended Consequences of the FIDIC 2017 Clause 20.1 Claims Classification System

Unintended Consequences of the FIDIC 2017 Clause 20.1 Claims Classification System

FIDIC’s 2017 editions introduced a new Claims management system in clause 20 that channels Claims through two very different procedures. One of them is very simple and involves almost no risk whereas the other will require investment of significant project resources, will take the parties a considerable amount of time to resolve and carries fatal consequences if not followed properly. It has therefore become a priority for anyone handling this Claims management system to understand how clause 20.1 sorts the different types of Claims and to recognise that the classification scheme is not as straightforward as the wording of the Contract suggests, as explored in this article.

By Gabriel Mulero Clas|October 29th, 2018|featured, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off

Clause 12 – Tests after Completion

Clause 12 – Tests after Completion

Clause 12 deals with Tests after Completion. It is more

By George Rosenberg|January 27th, 2018|Knowledge Hub|Comments Off

Clause 6 – Staff and Labour

Clause 6 – Staff and Labour

The 2017 Clause 6 is largely the same as its 1999 counterpart. However, it contains some notable additions and differences, the most glaring of which is the addition of a new type of staff/labourer to the Contractor’s Personnel called Key Personnel in Sub-Clause 6.12.

By Gabriel Mulero Clas|January 27th, 2018|Knowledge Hub|Comments Off

Get in touch