Call/WhatsApp: +1 332 209 4094

International Construction Contracts

International Construction Contracts 

No specific word limit is assigned to each component of the assessment. Please
feel free to allocate word limits to each component as appropriate. Kindly ensure
that your total word count for all assessment components adheres to the word
limit above (i.e. 3750 words +/- 10%).
Scenario
Forecasters Construction Limited (FCL), a Singaporean construction company,
ventured into the UK construction market two years ago. The first project won
by the group was a privately financed multi-purposed housing development in
Aberdeen under the NEC4 ECC Contract Option A (without amendment save as is
expressly mentioned in this scenario). Although very well known for their
expertise in the use of FIDIC contracts in Singapore, this was the first time FCL
had used the NEC4 ECC contract. According to the Contract data, the Client and
the Contractor were to share design responsibilities. Part I of the Contract Data
set out clearly each party’s responsibilities. FCL employed Accurate Designers to
produce the required drawings. These were reviewed and approved by the
designers engaged by the Client. Construction work commenced in mid-2019
and for the ensuing six months, FCL struggled to cope with the contract
administration demands under the NEC4 ECC contract. FCL are used to the FIDIC
terms, contractual language and approach. When it comes to the NEC4, they are
particularly baffled by the extension of time and variation procedures under the
NEC4 ECC contract. The project team from Singapore had heard of the NEC4
ECC contract but had assumed that they would be familiar with the processes,
after all, both the FIDIC and the NEC contract forms have English origin and are
for ‘big’ construction.
Recently, the Project Manager had requested a quote in relation to a change event.
Soon after the process for dealing with the quotes under the NEC4 ECC had been
concluded, it became obvious to officials of FCL that the ‘estimates’ used were
woefully inadequate. They are hoping that the work will be re-measured and valued
at completion and the figures adjusted. On a related matter, the outcome of a
compensation event process led by the Project Manager had taken a different view
from FCL and ‘tweaked’ FCL’s provisional figures. FCL disagree with the outcome of
the process and has recently commenced adjudication proceedings. In the course of
the adjudication process, FCL have obtained the actual costs of the compensation
events. These figures are higher than the provisional estimates previously provided
to the Project Manager at the time of assessment. FCL sought
to have the actual cost acknowledged and considered but the