Search results

Usually, a construction contract ends because the Parties have performed all their obligations thereunder but sometimes the need to terminate the contract arises before this. This need may have various reasons, e.g. one of the Parties goes into bankruptcy without the funds available for continuing the project, a substantial risk materialises to the detriment of the continuation of the project (e.g. substantial sub-surface issues, pollution etc.), other risks materialise, substantially increasing the cost of the project, or the Employer simply no longer has a need for the Works. The GC include provisions for the termination of the Contract before the Parties have fully performed all their obligations under the Contract; termination by the Employer is provided for in Clause 15 [Termination by Employer] and termination by the Contractor in Clause 16 [Suspension and Termination by Contractor]. Termination is an extreme remedy, regardless of who terminates the Contract. In all but a very few projects, a termination will cause both Parties to suffer substantial loss; not all such losses are recoverable from the defaulting Party. Thus, termination is a remedy that should be reserved for extreme cases. In addition, the right to terminate depends on an interpretation of the Contract provisions and the application of these provisions to the situation at hand, including whether a specific default is sufficiently severe to entitle the other Party to terminate. Because the consequences of a termination are serious, the applicable Laws usually require a serious (substantial) default before a Contract may be terminated. Furthermore, the procedures prescribed in the GC must be followed because a failure to comply with the relevant procedure may render a termination ineffective or invalid.

Clause 17 addresses issues relating to the care of the Works (i.e. the risk of incidental loss or damage to the Works) and the indemnities provided by the Contractor and the Employer, as well as the shared indemnities. It may not make perfect sense to bundle care of the Works in the same Clause as indemnities, but they sit together for historic reasons as Clause 17 in the 1999 edition included liabilities as well as care of the Works and indemnities and, therefore, provided a comprehensive approach to risks, liabilities and indemnities. In the 2017 edition, the main provisions on liabilities have been moved to Sub-Clause 1.15 [Limitation of Liability]. The passing of risk (the care of the Works) is addressed in Sub-Clause 17.1 [Responsibility for Care of the Works]; some exceptions to the allocation of this risk are stated in Sub-Clause 17.2 [Liability for Care of the Works]. Indemnities are dealt with in the remaining Sub-Clauses: Sub-Clauses 17.3 [Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights], 17.4 [Indemnities by Contractor], 17.5 [Indemnities by Employer], and 17.6 [Shared Indemnities].

Usually, a construction contract ends because the Parties have performed all their obligations thereunder but sometimes the need to terminate the contract arises before this. This need may have various reasons, e.g. one of the Parties goes into bankruptcy without the funds available for continuing the project, a substantial risk materialises to the detriment of the continuation of the project (e.g. substantial sub-surface issues, pollution etc.), other risks materialise, substantially increasing the cost of the project, or the Employer simply no longer has a need for the Works. The GC include provisions for the termination of the Contract before the Parties have fully performed all their obligations under the Contract; termination by the Employer is provided for in Clause 15 [Termination by Employer] and termination by the Contractor in Clause 16 [Suspension and Termination by Contractor]. Termination is an extreme remedy for the Contractor as well as the Employer; Sub-Clause 16.1 [Suspension by Contractor] provides a less extreme remedy for the Contractor where they may suspend or reduce their performance of the work as an interim remedy against the Employer’s default. As for the Employer’s exercise of the remedies under Clause 15 [Termination by Employer], it is also recommendable for the Contractor to adhere diligently to the formal requirements of Clause 16 [Suspension and Termination by Contractor] and to seek relevant expert advice prior to suspending work or reducing the rate of progress or initiate termination procedures. See also the general introduction to termination under Clause 15.

In general, this Clause deals with the requirements pertaining to the recruitment and employment of Contractor’s Personnel. ‘Staff and Labour’ are not defined terms but this Clause deals primarily with Contractor’s Personnel, i.e. also the employees of Subcontractors and ‘any other personnel assisting the Contractor in the execution of the Works’, see Sub-Clause 1.1.16. However, some of the Sub-Clauses in Clause 6 [Staff and Labour] do not make it clear whether they relate solely to the Contractor’s ‘staff and labour’ or to Contractor’s Personnel in general, but this could be clarified in the Special Provisions

This Clause deals with the Contractor’s contractual obligations during the Defects Notification Period. Primarily, the Contractor shall remedy any defect or damage to the Works if such defect or damage is notified to the Contractor before the expiry of the DNP, regardless of what caused the defect or damage. This Clause also outlines the consequences of the Contractor failing to remedy defects or damage, the Contractor’s obligation to establish the cause of the defect or damage and provisions on the expiry of the DNP.

This Clause outlines the procedures for adding or omitting work, as well as other situations where the price to be paid by the Employer is to be adjusted. Variations may be initiated either directly by instructions from the Engineer or by a Request for Proposal where the Contractor is to prepare and submit a proposal which then forms basis for the Variation procedure. See Sub-Clause 13.3 [Variation Procedure]. Variations may have an impact on the Contract Price as well as on the Time for Completion and other elements of the Contract, see Sub-Clause 13.3 [Variation Procedure].

The aim of this research is to explore how a programmatic multi-project context influences project-based firms (PBFs) in organizing their relations with other PBFs and suppliers in a project-based industry.

A multiple case study research is conducted. Data are collected from two case studies in the construction infrastructure sector. Eleven interviews with contractors and other suppliers are the primary source of data collection. The data are complemented by procurement documents and expert consultations.

The findings show that within a programmatic multi-project context, PBFs settle relations with (1) key partners for program management capacity, PBFs establish relations with (2) main contractors to divide projects and (innovation) tasks, and PBFs intensify relations with (3) suppliers to ensure continuity and expertise.

The study contributes to the body of project management literature by exploring PBF’s relations with other PBFs and suppliers in a multi-project context. Based on empirical data, the study provides a distinction in layers presenting distinct levels of PBF’s supplier relations. This layer structure provides an excellent starting point for future studies exploring the program perspective of PBFs in the integrated supply chain.

Given the increase in programmatic multi-project context for project-based domains, discussed in both literature and practice, this study explores the effect of programs on relations of PBFs with other PBFs and suppliers. The study distinguishes PBF’s relations with the different suppliers in three layers and discusses the characteristics of these relations.

Clause 3 [The Engineer] contains the speci?c provisions for the Engineer, including the general requirements for the Engineer and their representative(s) and assistants, the replacement of the Engineer, the duties and authority of the Engineer and - importantly - the Engineer's role when managing the project, e.g. through instructions. In the 2017 edition, the Engineer's role as a ?rst venue for resolution of differences or disagreements between the Contractor and the Employer has been vastly expanded and the Sub-Clause covering this issue now runs to more than three pages rather than the two short paragraphs in the 1999 edition.

Clause 7 deals with the quality of the Contractor’s work, the Engineer’s verification thereof, remedies if the Contractor’s work is not in accordance with the Contract and some additional provisions on ownership and royalties. The quality assurance systems referred to in Sub-Clause 4.9 [Quality Management and Compliance Verification Systems] must be aligned with the provisions of this Clause; some elements of this Clause may be replaced in full by the QM Systems envisaged in Sub-Clause 4.9.

Clause 14 deals with the mechanisms for paying the Contractor. The Contract Price must be distinguished from the Accepted Contract Amount. The Accepted Contract Amount is the amount stated in the Letter of Acceptance. The Contract Price is the Accepted Contract Amount adjusted in accordance with the Contract e.g. through Variations and other changes under Clause 13 [Variations and Adjustments] and the various other Clauses entitling the Contractor to adjustments, including Cost or Cost Plus Profit as well as adjustments under any special agreements on payment based on quantities or measurements, e.g. under Sub-Clause 13.7 [Adjustments for Changes in Cost] or the last paragraph of Sub-Clause 14.1 [The Contract Price].