Christopher Ennis
October 2015
A paper presented to the inaugural conference of the Society of Construction Law South Africa in Cape Town on 10th September 2015
Where a form of contract contains provisions for an additional payment to the contractor where the employer (or someone on his behalf) instructs a variation, how should this additional or different work be valued? Christopher Ennis’s paper considers the difficulties which may be caused by the need to value variations; and the correct (or possible) approaches to these issues under the FIDIC Red and Yellow Books and under NEC3.
1. Introduction – 2. Relevant contractual provisions – 2.1 FIDIC – 2.2 NEC3 – 3. What is the issue? What could possibly go wrong under either form of contract? 3.1 Why is this worth worrying about anyway? – 3.2 Scenario 1: FIDIC Yellow Book – 3.3 Scenario 2: NEC3 Option B with priced bill of quantities – 3.4 Which party benefits from prospective or retrospective valuation? – 4. Concluding propositions: FIDIC – 5. Concluding propositions: NEC3.
The author: Christopher Ennis MSc FRICS FCIArb is a Director of Time | Quantum Expert Forensics Ltd; he practices as an expert witness (quantum), mediator, arbitrator and adjudicator. Email: chris@tqef.uk.com.
Text: 12 pages