Construction Law/Construction Law

Advertisement


Question
Dear Sir,
Contract under FIDIC 2006 MDB version. The Contractor's program included a road section to be started on 15th December 2011. Due to some design changes needed, the Engineer instructed the contractor not to work on this section. The Contractor has not started work there yet. After the design change, the Engineer instructed the contractor new drawings and instructed to start work on 20th March 2012. The Contractor gave notice of claim under s.cl 20.1 only on 25th January 2012 (28 days after the due date)Can the Engineer set off this delay of giving notice (28 days)from the contractor's entitlement of EOT ? Has the Employer not waved the notice requirement when he considered EOT? of a belated claim. Thank you
Mututantree

Answer
Dear Mututantree,
Thank you for your question.
I am inclined to consider the stated case as a variation under clause 13 due to change in drawings and consequent suspension of works from 15 December to 25 January 2011. In fact Engineer could have asked contractor's own proposal before ordering this change. Under these contractor could have claimed EOT as well as monitory compensation. This has a bit different methodology from dealing it as a claim. Can you please clarify how this approach can fit in your case?
Regards,
Liaqat Hayat

Construction Law

All Answers


Answers by Expert:


Ask Experts

Volunteer


Liaqat Hayat

Expertise

I can answer questions based on FIDIC 4 and FIDIC 1999 [design-build] with particular reference to time extension , price adjustment and disputes. I am in particular more inclined for response to points pertaining to how claims should be framed and put up in case of technical or other contractual shortcomings. Regarding procurement matters I have spent over 5 years as procurement specialist for highway authority and dealt with numerous claims and disputes in the capacity of "The Engineer" .

©2016 About.com. All rights reserved.