Construction Law/1999 FIDIC Red Book


Dear Sir

1999 FIDIC Red Book

According to the SCL 13.1(e), any additional work instructed by the engineer shall be necessary for the Permanent Works.

If the instructed additional work is not necessary for the Permanent Works, then whether the contractor can object to execute or alternatively request for the different rates from the current BOQ.

For example, initial scope of work is only construct a building and then the engineer instructed do the swimming pool as a variation.

Could give your comment in line with SCL 13.1(e) .



Dear sudhantha,
Here question arises as who will decide the additional work is necessary or not? Obviously it is the engineer only as  per clause 13.1(fidic 1987).Regarding your swimming pool example,if it to be used by building occupants then in that it is not additional work the way you are considering it.IF ,HOWEVER ,you have a disagreement with THE ENGINEER'S opinion then you have to proceed as per clause 20 or cl 67 DEPENDING ON fidic edition

Construction Law

All Answers

Answers by Expert:

Ask Experts


Liaqat Hayat


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" .

©2017 All rights reserved.