Blog - CMGuide

Construction Law, Contract Administration, Project Management

Telling a Contractor to Speed Up: The Instruction Employers Keep Getting Wrong

By Dr Samer Skaik

A project falls behind. The Employer becomes anxious. Somebody suggests that the Engineer should instruct the Contractor to accelerate, and a letter goes out.

What happens next depends entirely on a distinction that is rarely drawn at the time the letter is written, and the cost of getting it wrong runs in both directions. I have seen Employers believe they had purchased acceleration when they had bought nothing at all, and I have seen Contractors treat a routine progress instruction as a blank cheque and spend accordingly.

The provision at the centre of this is Sub-Clause 8.6 in the 1999 editions, renumbered 8.7 in 2017. It is worth being precise about what it does, because it is almost the opposite of what people assume. …

Telling a Contractor to Speed Up: The Instruction Employers Keep Getting WrongRead More »

Construction Law, Contract Administration, Dispute Boards, Project Management

What Does a Dispute Board Actually Cost? A Straight Answer for Public Employers

Leave a Comment

By Dr Samer Skaik

Of all the questions I get asked by public sector clients, this is the one that arrives most often by private message rather than in the meeting.

People are slightly embarrassed to ask it. There is a sense that enquiring about the cost of a dispute mechanism is somehow unserious, or that it reveals you have not read something you should have read. So the question gets asked quietly, usually after the formal session has ended, and it is almost always phrased the same way: what does one of these actually cost us?

It is an entirely reasonable question and I wish more people asked it earlier and out loud. A project manager who cannot answer it cannot get the budget line approved, and a budget line that is not approved is one of the most common reasons a board never gets appointed at all. So let me try to answer it plainly. …

What Does a Dispute Board Actually Cost? A Straight Answer for Public EmployersRead More »

Construction Law, Contract Administration, Dispute Boards, Project Management

When the Banks moved onto FIDIC 2017: What Public Employers Inherited With the New Contract

Leave a Comment

By Dr Samer Skaik

A few years ago I sat in a workshop with the contract management team of a national roads agency. They were good at their jobs. Several of them had been administering donor-funded works contracts for well over a decade, and between them they had probably handled more claims than some law firms see in a generation.

About an hour in, one of the senior engineers said something that stopped the room. He said: we have been running this contract the way we ran the last four, and I am starting to think it is not the same contract.

He was right. It was not. …

When the Banks moved onto FIDIC 2017: What Public Employers Inherited With the New ContractRead More »

Construction Law, Contract Administration, Dispute Boards, Project Management

The Programme Nobody Agreed To: Sub-Clause 8.3 and What Silence Actually Means

Leave a Comment

By Dr Samer Skaik

Ask three people on a FIDIC project what status the programme has, and you will usually get three answers.

The planner thinks it is a management tool. The contractor’s commercial manager thinks it is the baseline against which every delay claim will eventually be measured. And the Engineer, if pressed, will often say that it was never approved, which is a curious thing to say about a document the whole project has been working to for two years.

All three are partly right, and the confusion is not their fault. Sub-Clause 8.3 is one of the shortest provisions in the contract carrying one of the heaviest practical loads, and it does not answer the question everyone actually wants answered: is this thing binding? …

The Programme Nobody Agreed To: Sub-Clause 8.3 and What Silence Actually MeansRead More »

Construction Law, Contract Administration, Dispute Boards, Project Management

The First Four Weeks: How Public Infrastructure Employers Set a Project Up to Avoid Disputes

Leave a Comment

By Dr Samer Skaik

The call usually comes about eighteen months in.

Someone from an implementing agency, often a project manager who has inherited the file from a predecessor, explains that things have gone badly wrong. The ground turned out differently from the investigation report. The utility diversions never happened. The contractor has submitted a claim with a number in it large enough that it has now been seen by people several floors above the project office. And somewhere in the conversation comes the question I have learned to brace for: we think the contract requires us to have a dispute board — how quickly can one be set up? …

The First Four Weeks: How Public Infrastructure Employers Set a Project Up to Avoid DisputesRead More »

Construction Law, Contract Administration

Risk Allocation Under FIDIC: Employer’s Risks versus Contractor’s Risks in Clause 17

Leave a Comment

Every FIDIC contract is, at its core, a risk allocation instrument dressed up in construction terminology. Clause 17 is where that allocation is made explicit, dividing the universe of things that can go wrong on a project into two camps: risks the Contractor bears because it priced them, insured them, or is simply best placed to manage them, and risks the Employer bears because no reasonable contractor could have priced or controlled them. Getting this distinction wrong at tender stage, or misapplying it during the works, is one of the most common sources of disputes on international projects.

…

Risk Allocation Under FIDIC: Employer’s Risks versus Contractor’s Risks in Clause 17Read More »

Construction Law, Contract Administration, Dispute Boards, Project Management

Parties’ Strategies for Selecting High-Performance Dispute Boards

Leave a Comment

In construction projects, the effectiveness of a Dispute Adjudicaiton Board (DB)—or Dispute Avoidance & Adjudication Board (DAAB)—is often determined long before the first project site meeting takes place. The process of appointing board members is a critical phase, acting as the foundation for how effectively a project will manage disagreements and maintain progress.

…

Parties’ Strategies for Selecting High-Performance Dispute BoardsRead More »

Construction Law, Contract Administration, Dispute Boards, Project Management

How to nominate a dispute board member (DAAB) under FIDIC contracts?

Leave a Comment

Disputes are almost a given in international construction projects. That’s why the FIDIC contracts include a smart system for resolving them quickly and fairly through Dispute Avoidance/Adjudication Boards, or DAABs. One of the most talked-about resources in this area is the FIDIC President’s List of Approved Dispute Adjudicators — basically a go-to directory of well-respected experts.

If you’re an employer, contractor, engineer, or legal advisor working on FIDIC-based projects, knowing how this list works — and how flexible the appointment process really is — can save you a lot of time, money, and headaches. In this guide, we’ll walk you through the key points in plain language. …

How to nominate a dispute board member (DAAB) under FIDIC contracts?Read More »

Construction Law, Dispute Boards

Virtual Site Visits for Dispute Boards under FIDIC Contracts

Leave a Comment

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the digital transformation of many industry practices, including how Dispute Adjudication Boards (DABs) conduct site visits under FIDIC contracts. What began as a necessity has proven to be a pragmatic and efficient alternative to physical site visits. This post explores the contractual basis, emerging best practices, real-world case studies, and the benefits of virtual site visits, advocating for their continued use in the future. …

Virtual Site Visits for Dispute Boards under FIDIC ContractsRead More »

Construction Law, Contract Administration, Dispute Boards

DAAB Jurisdiction under FIDIC 2017: The Distinction from Admissibility

Leave a Comment

The FIDIC 2017 suite of contracts (Red, Yellow, and Silver Books) introduced the Dispute Avoidance/Adjudication Board (DAAB) as a key improvement in dispute resolution. This post explains how DAAB jurisdiction is established, how the DAAB makes decisions on jurisdiction and admissibility, and the important difference between these two concepts. Special focus is given to time-barred claims under Sub-Clause 20.2, based on the FIDIC 2017 General Conditions, the DAAB Procedural Rules, and relevant legal commentary. …

DAAB Jurisdiction under FIDIC 2017: The Distinction from AdmissibilityRead More »

Construction Law, Contract Administration

Termination under FIDIC: For Cause and For Convenience under Clauses 15 and 16 (1999 vs 2017)

Leave a Comment

Termination is the most drastic remedy available under any construction contract, and the FIDIC forms are no exception. Bringing a contract to a premature end exposes both parties to substantial financial consequences, demobilisation costs, claims for loss of profit, and frequently protracted disputes over whether the termination was lawful in the first place. The FIDIC suite addresses termination through two parallel regimes — Clause 15, which governs termination by the Employer, and Clause 16, which governs suspension and termination by the Contractor. A wrongful termination can convert the terminating party from an aggrieved innocent into a repudiating defendant overnight, so the procedural discipline these clauses demand is not optional ceremony but the very thing that determines who wins.

…

Termination under FIDIC: For Cause and For Convenience under Clauses 15 and 16 (1999 vs 2017)Read More »

Construction Law, Contract Administration, Dispute Boards

The Engineer’s Role in Dispute Prevention: Agreement and Determination under FIDIC Sub-Clause 3.7 (2017)

Leave a Comment

One of the most significant structural changes in the FIDIC 2017 suite is the formalisation of the Engineer’s role in resolving disagreements between the Employer and Contractor before they escalate into formal disputes. Under Sub-Clause 3.7 of the 2017 Red, Yellow, and Silver Books, the Engineer is now required to follow a two-stage process — first attempting to facilitate an agreed settlement, and then, if agreement is not reached, issuing a formal Determination. This structured mechanism replaces the relatively brief Sub-Clause 3.5 of the 1999 editions and reflects a deliberate policy decision by FIDIC to embed dispute prevention into the contractual administration framework. Understanding how this process works — and where it can go wrong — is essential for every Engineer, Contractor, and Employer working on FIDIC projects.

…

The Engineer’s Role in Dispute Prevention: Agreement and Determination under FIDIC Sub-Clause 3.7 (2017)Read More »

Your Complete Resource for Construction Law & Contract Management