Aauu PDF
Aauu PDF
Aauu PDF
B.Sc. Thesis on
Comparison of Local Vs. International
Conditions of Contract for
construction works
presented by
Ermias Mesfin Rekik Makonnen
Selamawit Berhe Tesfa Tilahun
August, 2006
Acknowledgement
Our heartfelt appreciation goes to Dr. Wubshet Jakale, who gave us invaluable
advice and guidance toward the ultimate goal of this paper.
We would also like to thank the World Bank and African Development Banks for
providing their Standard Conditions of Contracts, without which our paper
would have been incomplete.
Our thanks also go to Eng. Zerfu Tesfaye, (of ERA) for his endless
resourcefulness and Eng. Ismael Ibrahim for his boundless suggestions which
made our paper what it is now.
We should also mention all those who invested their precious time filling out our
questionnaires and giving us, in person, all the useful information related to our
specific concern.
Finally, we would like to express our deepest gratitude to our friends and
families for their admirable support throughout the whole journey of this project.
The desk study classifies the contents of the Standard Conditions in eight
categories. It then sets the provisions of the Standard Conditions in the context of
Ethiopian law and identifies the need for and application of provisions in the
clauses. Further down the line, the desk study concentrates on specific clauses
and identifies the differences in these clauses, their sub-clauses, paragraphs and
sentences.
The field survey, in the form of a questionnaire, identified the impacts of such
differences. The practical application of the provisions and the practice in the
absence of explicit provisions is explored in this section which finally led to the
conclusions and recommendations.
Background
Construction projects are characterised by business relationships and
commitments that are spread over wide time horizons. Large-scale engineering
projects have distant time horizons and require significant up-front
commitments, while posing large potential downside losses. (Floricel S, Miller R.,
2001)
Their limitation is also in the fact that it is hard to expect them to address every
eventuality that may occur throughout the life of a construction project. At best,
the contract conditions serve as models from which individual project
stakeholders can devise better fitted contract documents.
Further down the line, provisions in various bid documents vary since the
standard conditions that they arise from are different. This will inevitably create
inefficiencies and uncertainties amongst the users of the documents, and
increases the possibility of disputes.
Ethiopia is among the least developed countries in the world which are
dependent on foreign aid to carry out large construction projects. Several donors
are involved in the financing of such projects in our country. This has led to
differences in regulatory and planning frameworks adopted by each donor
agency. Such framework differences are also manifested in Standard Conditions
of Contract adopted, not only between local and international Standard
Conditions but also among those adopted by particular donors. This has created
several problems like duplication of efforts, the need to adapt to different states
of mind for different conditions of contract, lack of capacity, and long and slow
decision-making processes.
Research goals
Our study recognises that the problems stated in the previous section are
significant as are the benefits of standardisation. Harmonization of the existing
documents is necessitated to avoid adversarial relationships, ambiguity and
conflict that have been observed in practice. This paper will explore such
modification in both the general and standard conditions of contract.
Method of research
Acknowledging the fact that the topic of our study is related to Contract
Management Concepts, we investigated literature on this issue and brought our
findings to the paper’s context. We then studied each Standard Condition to
organize the clauses into a group of eight. (Refer to literature review, pp 18)
The second chapter details the adopted methodology step by step. The rationale
of the research questions is ascertained and each section of the questionnaire is
discussed in detail.
The third chapter contains the main body of the paper which discusses the
differences, summarises the responses to the questionnaire and finally forwards
recommendations.
Chapter Four is the final chapter which comprises of the conclusion whereby
solutions to the identified problem are suggested.
It is an accepted rule of law that a person has a duty to read and understand a
contract before accepting it and his/her failure to do so will not excuse her/his
ignorance of the contents. With this in mind, let us look at the basic contents of
contracts and their major characteristics especially from the perspective of
Ethiopian law.
I. Formation of Contract
There are essential requirements with respect to the nature and circumstances of
the commitment that must be fulfilled for a contract to be valid. The following
are some of the essential features:
According to the Civil Code of Ethiopia the offer or acceptance may be made orally or
in writing or by signs normally in use or by a conduct such that, in the circumstances of
the case, there is no doubt as to the party's agreement. (Article 1681 (1))
An offer may and can be withdrawn at any time unless there is a separate
contract under which it is to be kept open. However, revocation of the offer is
only effective when it has been communicated to the person to whom the offer
was made. The acceptance must be in the same terms as the offer and it must be
unequivocal. If the acceptance does not fulfill this criterion, it is considered to be
a counter-offer which is unto the offer or to accept or reject.
3. Capacity to contract
Capacity means the legal competence of parties to enter into legally binding
contract. In general, every citizen of the country has the status to enter into
contractual agreement. This excludes minors (those under the age of 18, under
the Ethiopian law), mentally ill and incompetent individuals and those who
enter into contract under the influence of alcohol or other drugs.
5. Formalities
The requirement of formalities depends on the nature of the contract. Some
contracts must be in writing or in a form acceptable by law. Such provision for
forms of contract is stipulated in the Civil Code of Ethiopia in Article 1719:
(1) Unless otherwise provided, no special form shall be required and a contract
shall be valid where the parties agree.
(2) Where a special form is expressly prescribed by law such form shall be
observed.
(3) The parties may stipulate that the contract shall be made in a special form.
Whenever these formalities require that the contract to be in the form of writing,
the law also has provisions toward these:
A contract which the parties agree to make in special form not required by law shall not
be deemed to be completed until it is made in the agreed form. (Article 1726)
V. Discharge of Contracts
Events that may result in the discharge of contracts can be categorized into four
groups:
1. Performance
In order to be fully discharged from a contract the parties must have
completed all the obligations set in terms of contract. Other causes of
extinction are where (Article 1807)
(1) The contract in which it is provided is invalidated or cancelled; or
(2) The parties or one of them enforce a provision made in the contract
for the termination of the contract; or
(3) The parties agree to substitute a new obligation for the original
obligation; or
(4) The debtor’s obligation is set off by an obligation owing from the
creditor; or
(5) The positions of creditor and debtor are merged in the same person;
or
(6) Performance of the contract has not been demanded within a fixed
period.
2. Agreement
Under this classification fall Mutual Agreement, Novation and Accord &
Satisfaction.
3. Breach
Breach of contract occurs when a party fails to carryout its fundamental
contractual obligations under the contract. Breach of contract by one party
may result in forced performance, an entitlement to damages or in a right to
cancellation. Where a party does not carry out his obligations under the contract, the
other party may, according to the circumstances of the case, require the enforcement
of the contract or the cancellation of the contract or in certain cases may himself
cancel the contract. (Article 1771, (1)) He may in addition require that the damage
caused to him by nonperformance be made good. (Article 1771, (2))
A party to the contract that is invoking nonperformance of the contract,
however, should give notice to the other party aforehand and in default
require him by notice to carry out his obligations as stated in the contract.
4. Frustration
Occurs when the contract was executable at time of agreement but
subsequent events, over which the contracting parties have no control, make
it impossible to fulfill the contract obligations.
The Ethiopian Civil Code deals with the issue of frustration under Article
1792, Force Majeure.
Construction Contracts
Construction contracts are the written agreements signed by the contracting
parties (mainly an owner and a contractor), which bind them, defining
relationships and obligations. (O'Reilly 1996)
The design of the project contract has a major impact on the economic success of
both parties and on the behavior of the parties in their attempt to maximize their
upside or protect themselves from a downside. (C.V. Branconi and C.H. Loch,
2003)
With one or two relatively limited exceptions, the law relating to construction
contracts worldwide in the common law world is free of direct statutory
intervention. (G. A. Hughes and J. N. Barber, 1985) Ethiopia, on the other hand,
applies Civil Law which has codes that set down principles of law. The laws
governing construction projects are specifically stated in the Civil Code of
Ethiopia, 1960, as Contracts for works and labor relating to work to be done in
connection with the building, repair, or installation or immovables (Articles 3019 –
3040) and Contracts for Public Works (Articles 3244 – 3296).
These construction contracts are governed by the law of Contract, while they cut
across the law of extra-contractual liability (tort) and the law of property with
respect to their legal provenance. (Ismael, 2006)
According to FIDIC 1987 and MoWUD 1994, “contract” means the Contract
Agreement, the Letter of Acceptance, the Letter of Tender, these Conditions, the
Specification, the Drawings, the Schedules, and the further documents (if any)
which are listed in the Contract Agreement or in the Letter of Acceptance.
The general conditions of construction contracts vary from one set to another.
This is largely due to the different requirements of the agency that originated
them. However, most address similar issues, although they may not do so in the
same manner.
The advantage of the adaptation of Standard Conditions is that with the passage
of time individuals using them become familiar with their overall content as well
as their particular strengths and weaknesses. (N.J.Smith, 1995)
The Green Book is for smaller projects while the other three are applicable for
bigger and more complex projects. The Yellow Book is a condition used for
Design -Build type of contracts where the Contractor designs and builds the
project. The Design-Build assignment is based on a list of requirements which
exonerates the employer from many risks.
The Silver Book is for private financed projects where the contractor takes
responsibilities for an incalculable amount of risk. Build Operate Transfer type of
projects employ the provisions of this book.
The Orange Book is an amended form of the Red Book for Design-Build or Build-
Operate-Transfer (BOT) projects. The contractor, in this case, is involved in the
conception, design, construction, operation and maintenance of the project.
The Red Book, the major focus of this paper, is used for admeasurement
contracts where the employer designs the project and thus assumes the risks for
it. The Red Book form of contract, for works and Civil Engineering construction,
comprises two parts. Part I of the 'General Conditions' define the rights and
obligations of the parties and provide definitive information about the
Contractual-legal relationships between the parties to the contract. Part II,
'Conditions of Particular Application' are clauses specifically drafted to meet the
The basic scope of coverage of conditions of contract is similar in both local and
international general conditions of contract for construction works. We have
chosen to group these conditions for the purpose of our desk study as following:
In general, the definitions actually given in this clause are self explanatory. When
they are given elsewhere, comment is made at the point concerned.
2. Contract Documents
The contract document consists of various documents, letter of acceptance, the
tender document, particular conditions of contract, general condition of contract,
specifications, drawings, bill of quantities and other documents forming part of
the contract, in ranking order of priority. The documents forming the contract are
to be taken as mutually explanatory of one another. Establishing the order of
precedence of the various documents contained will help to set a hierarchy of
importance while reviewing contracts when contradictions arise between them.
The contractual participants to a construction project are the client (who is the
instigator) construction consultants of various specializations (who act as the
client’s professional advisors) and the constructors (who construct).
Labor
All relevant labor laws applicable to the contractors personnel's, including laws
related to their employment, health, safety, well fair and legal rights are included
in this part.
The construction team for a complex building project may represent a large
manufacturing and marketing concern while on the other hand a labor intensive
activity may call on little by way of plant and finance to support it. (Turner 1981)
Suspension
Work may be suspended in whole or in part, and the nature of a suspension is to
cease all or part of the work without actual contract termination. The owner may
order the constructors in writing to suspend or delay, or interrupt all or part of
the work for as long as deemed necessary. However, if the work is delayed or
suspended for a longer period than specified, the constructors may claim an
adjustment in price for delay damage as well as additional time.(Fisk,1994)
Nominated Subcontractors
A nominated subcontract is a subcontractor but with whom the architect/client
has a special concern. In the first instance, the client/architect has reserved to
himself rather than delegate to the constructors final selection and approval of
such a person after the contract has been placed, either by providing for a prime
cost or by naming the sub-constructors. (Turner, 1981)
Measurement
The amount of work performed by the constructer will be measured for the
purpose of payments and certificates. The measured quantities of all works
should be in accordance with the contract.
Provisional Sum
Provisional sums are often used to cover work which cannot be described and
given in measured or other items, such as in a specification. The power to include
sums depends on the contractual provisions on this issue, as does on an
understanding of what they really are. In the case of defined sums, the
constructors may be deemed to have made due allowance in programming,
A contract change has three parts. The first part is the written approval of the
change. The second part is the written directive to the contractor to perform the
work involved in the change. The third part is the obligation of funds necessary
to pay for that work. (www.dot.state.il.us)
• they can be the result of disagreement about whether a specific item was covered
under the contract document or an extra cost to the constructor.
• they can arise over concealed or unknown conditions when there is disagreement
about whether the constructor should have anticipated them.
• they can also occur over delays in the jobs and disagreements about who caused
them
The contract usually prescribes the procedure for processing the claim once the
contractor has properly submitted it. In some contracts, these procedures are relatively
straight forward, resulting in reasonably prompt consideration of the claim by the
owner's engineer or construction manager. Owners usually awaits the recommendation
of the Engineer or Construction Manager before communicating their position or the
claim back to the Contractor, either accepting it, denying it, or accepting in part or
denying in part. The contractor then must either accept the owner's decisiosn or dispute
it, and invoke the dispute resolution procedure of the contract, usually within a stated
number of days after receiving the decision. (Bartholomew, 2002)
7. Remedial rights
Dispute resolution
Disputes generally arise after the failure of one or more project participants to
fulfill their contractual obligations. No construction project is free from problems
and when problems are not immediately solved as they arise, they Disputes
Disputes may arise over the claimed effects of the issue of many variations, over
extensions of time claimed but not given, over disruption and often prolongation
of the works, over loss and/or expense claimed to have arisen as an effect of the
prolongation and/or disruption, over liquidated or unliquidated damages etc. In
the midst of 'expense based' claims, disputes may arise from different
interpretation by the parties over extension of time, deduction or not of
liquidated damages, valuation of variations, even interpretation of instruction as
variations or not...etc (Dennis & Alan Turner, 1999)
The express term of contract should provide solution to any contractual disputes
that arise between the parties by reference to the contract terms appropriate to
the circumstances. But since some difficulties may arise in the definition of the
express terms and their relation to the legalities of events or events causing the
dispute; it is likely to result in the need for a third party (court, arbitration, or
mediator) to assist in the resolution of the disputes.(Turner,1981)
In the event that the resident Consultants cannot resolve the differences in the
field, the problem should be discussed with the Consultants or the owner. If the
difference still cannot be resolved within the terms of the contract, the
constructors should be reminded of the provisions of the contract documents
relating to the time and methods to file claims, and such reminder should be
recorded in the resident Consultant’s diary.(Fisk,1994)
Retention
Many construction contracts provide that a certain percentage of each progress
payment will be retained by the owner. A typical 10% is retained and kept by the
owner until job completion and acceptance by the owner after final complete
payment is made. Owners look on retention as further protection against
eventualities such as the cost of remedying defective work, settlement of liens or
8. Others
Release from Performance
A contract is a legally binding agreement between two or more persons. The
agreement will be enforced by the courts. Release from performance occurs due
to performance (completion of obligation), agreement, breach and frustration as
stated earlier.
Special risk
In a contractual sense, a special risk (Force Majeure) means a condition beyond a
party's control. In addition to owner-caused delays, acts of God, war, riots, labor
strikes, inability to obtain critical materials when all proper procurement actions
have been taken and other similar situations are common conditions of Force
Majeure. (Bartholomew, 2001)
Since such conditions are not the contractor's fault, the contract relief for
conditions of Force Majeure normally is an extension of contract time to avoid ht
unfair assessment of liquidated damages. The delay may also be compensable.
Notice
In any successful relationship either personal or professional relies on good
communication between the parties. A construction team is no different. They
are many methods for communication, formal of informal. International
communications are
This chapter will describe the research methods applied for this study. It will
dissect our every approach and justify adoption of particular methods.
As stated earlier, the main aim of this paper is to bring constructive change to the
standard conditions of contract adopted in the country by harmonising them into
a single all-rounded document that is able to address thoroughly every possible
event in the construction process. Our paper thus identified differences in the
desk study and assessed impacts via the field survey. Our approach to achieve
that has been as follows.
The next step was to look into the provisions in the Civil Code of Ethiopia, 1960
on Administrative Contracts. This helped us to interpret and place in context
both the national and international Standard Conditions from the perspective of
Ethiopian law.
Our comparative study did not incorporate such clauses whose apparent
difference was only of structure. Other laws which have primacy over our
standard conditions abridge the seemingly different connotations. An example is
in the Variations clause where FIDIC, 1987 elaborates that omission of works is
interpreted as excluding those to be carried out by the Employer or by another
contractor. The MoWUD conditions are lacking in exhaustive or enumerative
listings of what omission consists of. However, the Civil Code, which is on a
higher hierarchy of laws has already provided for what such omissions exclude.
A questionnaire (to be covered in more detail in the next section) was prepared
based on our findings of the comparative study of the topics stated above.
During its distribution, however, we found out that we had to retune our targets
because of a technical glitch.
The World Bank, like other Multilateral Development Banks (MDB) uses the
FIDIC, 1992 Conditions and introduces additional amendment clauses
(mandatory, optional and recommended annotations) in the Particular
Conditions.
What we had initially been able to obtain from the World Bank Procurement
Department was the MDB Harmonized Edition which still remains to be put in
practice. We thus had to review our work in light of this finding and incorporate
the FIDIC, 1992 document as amended by World Bank Particular Conditions
(2004) as a major document for comparison. We continued to still include the
unpractised MDB Harmonized Edition. Our choice was made in recognition of
the benefits of the harmonisation effort made by the Multilateral Development
Banks.
Our review is now based on the Ethiopian General Conditions (MoWUD), FIDIC
(red book, fourth edition reprinted, 1992) and MDB Harmonized Construction
Contracts. The new Ethiopian General Conditions issued by Public Procurement
Agency (PPA) in January 2006 have been incorporated in our discussion.
The pertinence of this section is related to our identification of the gulf between
the economic policy of the country which encourages private controlled
businesses and the pervasive role of the government in monitoring activities.
In these clauses lie major differences of the Standard Conditions which
determine the role of government bodies (such as MoWUD), the Engineer (in
relation to the Engineer's technical expertise) and the Employer (as the initiator
and financier of the project).
The first two sets of questions gear the respondents toward identifying which
parties should limit the powers of which and investigate the validation of
instructions that are not in writing. The third set of questions tests the position of
the Contractor (to contradict, make suggestions, bargain on and contest) the
assignment of a replacement Engineer and the need or not for authentication of
this rights in the Standard Conditions.
The Engineer's right to change the sequence and timing of construction is next
explored with respect to the predictability of the construction process and the
Contractor's role in receiving and executing such instructions.
Variation
The Contractor has usually been obliged to execute any variation instruction
issued by the Engineer as long as the variation order is necessary for the
Contract. However, based on the FIDIC MDB Harmonized Edition condition,
this section of the questionnaire explores what more rights can be afforded the
Contractor to justifiably not execute variation orders. This part of the
questionnaire was designed to also help identify the stigma harboured by non-
contractors against giving up more rights to the Contractor.
The next set explores what the possible application and outcome of a dispute
board would be whenever disputes arise. It is a minute survey of how many
practitioners are for the establishment of dispute boards for individual projects.
Method of Analysis
We used a descriptive method of analysis and employed inductive reasoning.
The qualitative data was analysed using the frequency method in our discussion
and percentile representation is in the appendix.
Our review was thus based on the Ethiopian General Conditions (MoWUD),
FIDIC, 1992 amended by World Bank Particular Conditions (2004), FIDIC (red
book, fourth edition reprinted, 1992) and MDB Harmonized Construction
Contracts. The new Ethiopian General Conditions issued by Public Procurement
Agency (PPA) in January 2006 have been incorporated in our discussion.
Our study recognizes that the problems that arise from the differences in the
Standard Conditions are significant. The way out suggested after much
deliberation is a harmonization of the contracts.
Harmonisation on an international level could be the best remedy but may not be
practicable because of the high cost it entails. Radical change in the standard
conditions is an arduous task and difficult to recommend since practitioners are
already accustomed to these documents. Years of application have tried and
tested undisputed applicability and importance of the Standard Condition.
Our recommendation in this section and in the conclusion aim for the MoWUD
Conditions to benefit from the experiences gained in applying clauses that are
absent in them but are present in FIDIC and MDB Harmonised Conditions. This
is because Harmonisation is an opportunity to make other amendments that are
improvements on earlier clauses applied in General and Particular Conditions.
One document can share from the experience of application of its other
contemporaries. We believe that taking the best advantages of the other
provisions will not only strengthen the MoWUD documents but also increase
their acceptance in the Construction Industry.
Use of the harmonised conditions is likely to reduce the number of additions and
amendments to be included in the Particular Conditions. Nevertheless, most
projects will have special requirements which will necessitate some specific
changes. The need for Particular conditions can thus not be compromised
because of harmonisation of General Conditions.
The World Bank(2004) in its particular conditions provides most of these MDB
Harmonised provisions as an optional clause. Explanations are given in the notes
and additional clause part for the provisions of these optional clauses as, the
FIDIC Part II example is not sufficiently explicit for the purposes of this provision.
FIDIC was recommended for its ability to cater to all parties of the contractor and
many types of contracts. More authority is afforded to the Engineer for the
determination and the Employer is kept notified of his decisions. This was said
to facilitate the work since prompt decisions can be made. For further restrictions
FIDIC's Particular Conditions come in handy in delimiting which authorities
need to be checked by the Employer.
The World Bank, 2004 document adds optional clauses which further clarify the
FIDIC provisions. This outlines the authorities that optionally need to be
approved by the employer/financier in a set of environments. This ensures that
those decisions with financial impact will not be made without the employer's
knowledge.
The MDB Harmonized Edition goes one step ahead by including these
provisions in the General Conditions further empowering the employer who
possesses the money to decide on major issues instead of the agent- the Engineer.
The absence of an external authority saves time and avoids unnecessary delays.
The client agreement on the project activity will also make it easier to settle
disputes.
We are of the belief that powers and authorities of the Engineer are crucial to
keeping the work in compliance with some quality standard. Except where
otherwise specifically stated and subject to any restrictions in the Special
Conditions of Contract, the Engineer will decide contractual matters between the
Employer and the Contractor in the role representing the Employer.
The new Contract Conditions issued by the Public Procurement Agency (PPA,
2006), which has eliminated MoWUD's monitoring role with no public agency
substitution. PPA, 2006 has improved the MoWUD provisions in being more
lenient toward the Engineer's authorities while providing limitations such as sub
clauses 38.2(change in the Bill of Quantities and activity schedule):
The Engineer shall not adjust rates from changes in quantities if there by
the Initial Contract Price is exceeded by more than 15 percent, except with
the prior approval of the Employer.
2. Instructions in writing
FIDIC (1987) and the MDB harmonised conditions have separate clauses for
Instructions in writing which state the number of days in which a written
instruction should be provided by the Engineer. FIDIC (1987) provides a time
frame of 7 days while the Harmonised Conditions have a timeframe of 2 days.
Similar time frames also apply for the period within which the contractor is to
confirm or reject the written instructions of the Engineer in writing.
The MoWUD Standard Condition does not have a separate clause for
Instructions in Writing although the need for written instructions to be
performed is stated in the following clauses:
o Order for Variations to be in writing (sub- clause 51.2 ) (with
timeframe)
o Boreholes and exploratory excavations (sub- clause 51.2 )
In many other clauses, the need for instructions is explicitly stated but the form
of instruction (be it written or otherwise) is not expressly specified.
FIDIC was, on the other hand, commended by those who emphasized the need
for proper recording and referencing of all instructions. The same practitioners
agreed that the timeframe provided by FIDIC is adequate in the context of the
project life.
The MoWUD conditions specify the need for written instruction in only two
clauses (variations and borehole and Exploratory Excavation) how other
instructions are to be communicated remains ambiguous. Such ambiguity needs
resolution in the General Conditions which was provided for in the new PPA,
2006 document which states:
Thus all instructions should be in writing with a realistic timeframe, taking into
account the communication problem in our country. It is also possible if
considered to be necessary, to amend the dates in the particular conditions
This is not expressly stated in all practiced General Conditions in our country
(MoWud and FIDIC, 1987) but is explicitly present in FIDIC MDB harmonised
condition.
According to current practice, if the engineer is incompetent the need for change
or replacement will be paramount but it is not within the contractor's mandate to
initiate the issue. The Employer can terminate the Engineer's contract after
informing MoWUD and selection procedures will follow anew after the
termination has been justified. The contractor is not consulted throughout the
process and remains marginalized in the decision making.
On the other hand, some of the respondents believe the absence of this provision
has no effect under the Ethiopian environment where the construction contract
law is not practiced well.
Contract documents are prepared in such a way that both the rights of the
Contractor and the Employer are balanced and equally to be respected.
However, the impartiality of the Engineer in administering the contract should
still be asserted.
All Engineers stand for impartiality while it has been seen in practice that many
favour the interest of the Employer since they act as faithful advisors of the
Employer. This frequently creates disagreement between them and Contractors,
in which case Contractors' rights become highly suppressed. The Contractor will
not request any of his legal rights from fear of loosing a potential client. Legal
claims and intentions of claims are not entertained according to the standard
conditions most of the time.
The Employer and the Contractor have resorted to other venues to keep the
Engineer's partiality in check. In the case of the employer, he can terminate the
engineer citing default in executing his obligations under the consultancy
agreement entered between the two parties.
The Contractor, on the other hand, can resort to clause 67 of the standard
conditions of contract (Settlement of Disputes) when he feels the decision of the
We, like most of our respondents, agree upon the relevance of this clause. There,
however, is a persistent doubt as to how far such impartiality can realistically be
practiced. Even if its applicability had not been under question, impartiality
would still depend on various factors such as experience, ethics, individual
motives and professional integrity of the Engineer.
The standard Conditions can play a great role in delimiting impartiality and
guiding Engineers on how to stick to impartial practices while administering
contracts.
PPA of Ethiopia, 2006 has legally verified the practice of the industry in the
Disputes clause which states:
If the Contractor believes that a decision taken by the Engineer was either
outside the authority given to the Engineer by the Contract or that the
decision was wrongly taken, the decision shall be referred to the
Adjudicator within 14 days of the notification of the Engineer’s decision.
5. Variations
FIDIC, 1987 and MDB Harmonized Conditions state that the Engineer can
instruct the Contractor to change any specified sequence or timing of
construction of any part of the Works. The MoWUD Conditions do not expressly
stated provisions toward this.
The practice in the industry, in the absence of such provisions in the MoWUD
conditions, is very similar to the provisions in FIDIC, 1987. The Engineer
requests the Contractor to submit a comprehensive program showing a sequence
of work, the manpower development, the equipment and machinery layout
together with the cash flow requirement. In order to hit the Contract's target, the
Engineer reserves the right to revise the work program and change the specified
sequence and time. The Engineer can also change the sequence and time if the
employer requested the completion of a certain part earlier than previously
contracted. The Contractor is then warranted to claim for variation for both
cases.
In the absence this provision in the MoWUD Standard Condition, and a practice
that operates on its own accord (however similar to the FIDIC Conditions),
ambiguities are likely to arise. Therefore the Standard Condition should have an
expressly stated clause that authorizes the Engineer to change a specified
sequence and time of works. The Engineer shall submit his justifiable reasons for
doing so in order not to unnecessarily interfere with the rights and
responsibilities of the Contractor. . If otherwise the contractor should be allowed
to contradict. The Contractor, on the other hand should be allowed to claim for
variation of works due to change in sequence and time.
The MoWUD conditions, on the other hand, state that the Contractor shall give the
varied rate to the Engineer within 30 days and the Engineer shall give his comments on
the varied rate from the Contractor and forward the document for approval to the
Ministry of Works & Urban Development (MoWUD) within 15 days.
The provisions in all the three Standard Conditions are best fitted for different types of
Nevertheless, the range and scope of powers vested on the ministry on issues
which are subject to its prior approval are so wide and varied; it invariably takes
up quite sometime to obtain the ministry's 'go ahead' or 'no objection'.
The ministry, which has the final mandate to fix the prices, lacks a price index
/updated prices for material equipment and labour costs. Practitioners, who
have been frustrated by the inaccurate calculation that resulted from this, have
given in to carelessness and negligence in their price submittals to the ministry.
Unpredictable price escalation yet remains to be taken into genuine account and
thus there usually is a high range of difference in the prices on the contract
documents and those apparent in the market.
The contractor should, in all fairness, be given a chance to explain his cost
breakdown based on current and justified data. This recognizes the possibility of
Contractor's more at hand knowledge of prices and methodology of the work
which the Engineer and the Employer may not know.
1.1 If the final quantity of the work done differs from the quantity in the Bill of
Quantities for the particular item by more than 25 percent, provided the
change exceeds 5 percent of the Initial Contract Price, the Engineer shall
adjust the rate to allow for the change.
1.2 The Engineer shall not adjust rates from changes in quantities if thereby the
Initial Contract Price is exceeded by more than 15 percent, except with the
prior approval of the Employer.
1.3 If requested by the Engineer, the Contractor shall provide the Engineer with
a detailed cost breakdown of any rate in the Bill of Quantities
There are no expressly stated provisions (in relation to variation) in both FIDIC,
1987 and MoWUD General Conditions.
Many of our respondents agreed that variations are by definition necessary for
the contract and thus should be carried out by the Contractor according to
Variation clauses. All other works not necessary for contract should be done by
supplementary contract or a new tender and the Contractor's contradiction to the
varied work made by the will be handled as a claim.
The usual practice for application of variation orders starts with the Contractor
sending current and updated cost breakdown to the Engineer followed by
negotiations for new prices. Sometimes the rate may be revised as per Sub-
Clause 72 (d) of MoWUD Conditions (Change in Cost and Legislation). Unless
the engineer is willing to accept the document the situation will mostly end up in
argument.
The situation has been resolved to our satisfaction in the MDB Harmonized
Edition, which states under Sub-clause 13:
The contractor shall execute and be bound by each variation, unless the
contractor promptly gives notice to the Engineer stating (with supporting
particulars) that (i) the contractor cannot readily obtain the Goods
required for the variation or (ii) such variation triggers a substantial
change in the sequence or progress of the works.
PPA of Ethiopia's, 2006 has no provisions for the contradiction of the variation.
But the change in rate for the relevant items of work due to the change in time of
order is considered in this section. It is stated under Sub-clauses 40.2 as
If the cost per unit of quantity changes, or if the nature or timing of the
work in the Variation does not correspond with items in the Bill of
Quantities, the quotation by the Contractor shall be in the form of new
rates for the relevant items of work.
3. Variations
FIDIC, 1987 has additional provisions for variations which arise because of
breach or default of Contractor and any additional cost attributable to such
default shall be borne by the contractor. The clause is not expressly stated both in
MDB harmonised and MoWUD conditions.
5. Value Engineering
Value engineering is a management technique which stimulates the proper
execution of the work in the benefit of the Employer. The MDB harmonised
condition has a separate sub-clause concerned with Value Engineering and its
application thereof. There are no explicit provision with respect to Value
Engineering in both FIDIC, 1987 and MoWUD Conditions.
6. Valuation of Variations
a. FIDIC and MDB Harmonized Conditions have provisions for provisional rates
and prices for interim payments until agreement is reached on rates/prices that
are not directly available in the contract. There are no expressly stated provisions
with regard to this in MoWUD Conditions.
Under this clause the FIDIC, 1987 and MDB Harmonized Conditions of contract
clarify the procedures for claim in detail while the MoWUD conditions of
contract categorises Claim under the Variation clause without much detail on
how to address and resolve Claims.
Since the procedures for claim submission are not known and Contractors do not
know the rights they are afforded by this condition, many refrain from filing
claims. Even if they do the result is discouraging (many argue Employers are
favoured in terms of bargaining power) which finally leads to litigation and
arbitration.
MoWUD should, in our opinion, be harmonized with the FIDIC, 1987 and MDB
Harmonized Edition to encompass detailed provisions on how to submit and
2. Notice of Claims
Both FIDIC, 1987 & MoWUD stipulate that the Contractor shall claim for only
addition of payment. There are no expressly stated statements that pertain to
claims for time extension. The MDB Harmonized Conditions, on the other hand,
expressly state that the Contractor is entitled to claim for extension of time for
completion.
(a) Version 1 provides for disputes between the parties to be referred, in the
first place, to a Disputes Review Board (“the Board”) consisting of three
members. Details are provided in this version concerning the selection and
appointment procedure of the members of the board and their relevant
qualifications. The particular conditions further clarify the rules and
procedures for the functions of the board.
The Recommendation (and not decision as was the case in FIDIC, 1987) of the
Board shall be binding on both parties unless revised. If either the Employer or
the Contractor is dissatisfied with any Recommendation of the Board, or if the
Board fails to issue its Recommendation within 56 days, then the parties may
resort to arbitration after giving notice of their intention. (Timeframes for
procedure have been provided)
Version 1 is mandatory for contracts estimated to cost more than US$50 million
and for contracts referred to in the Procurement Schedule of the Loan
Agreement.
The MoWUD General Conditions state that whenever a dispute arises, it should
in the first place be referred to and settled by the Engineer. The Engineer shall
then give notice of his decision to the Employer and Contractor within 90 days. If
either party is dissatisfied with the Engineer's decision or additional 90 days
have passed after the expiry of the said 90 days, then the dispute may be referred
to and be finally settled by MoWUD or his Authorized Representative as an
arbitrator. The decisions of the Ministry shall be final and binding.
2. Amicable Settlement
FIDIC, 1987 and the MDB Harmonized Conditions have a separate clause which
advocates amicable settlement before the start of arbitration procedure. It is also
recommended here to start the arbitration after 56 days of notification of intent to
pursue arbitration. The World Bank Mandatory Clauses have deleted this sub-
clause. MoWUD Conditions do not have such explicit advocacy of amicable
settlement.
The World Bank Mandatory Clause replaces this sub-clause with its own
provisions in which it states that for contracts with foreign Contractors the
following shall apply:
o United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)
Arbitration rules,
o Rules of Conciliation and Arbitration of the International Chamber of
Commerce (ICC)
o Rules of Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce
o Rules of the London Court of International Arbitration
Any dispute between the Employer and a domestic Contractor arising in
connection with the present Contract shall be referred to adjudication or
arbitration in accordance with the laws of the Employer’s country.
The MDB Harmonized Conditions under the Arbitration clause state that for
contracts with foreign contractors, international arbitration with proceedings
administered by the institution appointed in the contract data or in accordance
with UNCITRAL arbitration rules should be applied. The conditions further
stipulate the place and language of the arbitration. For contracts with domestic
contractors, arbitration is to be conducted in accordance with the laws of the
Employer's country.
The World Bank mandatory clauses were the source of the dispute board
suggestion to handle disputes. The board, some argued, is cost effective, and has
various stages of dispute resolution opportunities.
Since the dispute board is selected by the parties to the contract, (to be neutral
and non-governmental) some impartiality and detail investigation on the
disputed issue can be maintained.
Those contending for FIDIC, 1987 provisions appreciated its time saving quality
which they believe is much higher than establishing a dispute board. FIDIC,
according to them, advocates amicable settlement more strongly.
Alternatively, the MoWUD conditions are best suited for the Ethiopian peculiar
code for litigation, where other forms of arbitration (other than the ministry)
would have taken much longer. It should be noted concurrently that MoWUD
has failed in many instances to be a fair arbiter because it roots for interest of the
government. Even when not leaning toward the government, the ministry
endorsees the analysis and suggestions transmitted by the Engineer.
If the Contractor believes that a decision taken by the Engineer was either
outside the authority given to the Engineer by the Contract or that the
decision was wrongly taken, the decision shall be referred to the
Adjudicator within 14 days of the notification of the Engineer’s decision.
I. Extension of time
a. Not Foreseeable Physical Obstructions or Conditions
According to FIDIC, 1987 and MDB Harmonized Conditions, the Engineer, if
convinced that the physical conditions could not have been foreseen by an
experienced Contractor determine any extension of time and amount of any costs
incurred to which the Contractor is entitled. MoWUD, on the other hand
acknowledges only imbursement for incurred costs because of unforeseeable
physical conditions.
d. Employer's risk
Entitlement to time extension based on loss or damage due to Employer's risk is
not expressly stated in all practiced General Conditions in our country (MoWud
and FIDIC, 1987) but is explicitly present in MDB harmonised condition.
e. Default of Employer
The FIDIC, 1987 and MDB Harmonized Conditions state that if the Contractor
suspends work or reduces the rate of work because of Default of Employer, then
the Engineer shall determine an extension of time and add to the Contract Price
the amount of costs incurred by Contractor because of Default of Employer. The
MoWUD provision however explicitly states only the payment of costs incurred
in the event of termination because of Default of Employer.
Though not mentioned in the MoWUD conditions, the other Conditions usually
entitle the contractor for extension of time for elapsed time related to Fossils and
Engineer's determination where tests were not provided for.
In practice, since the Engineer's representative witnesses how such cases for
fossils and the special risk situations affect the work schedule in progress,
approves reasonable time extension requests. The contractor also exercises the
right to claim for any time extension and financial claim for occurrence beyond
its capacity.
PPA of Ethiopia's, 2006 has provided in sub-clause 44.2 extension of time for
compensation events (listed in sub-clause 44.1) stated as:
The Explanatory Notes of the World Bank, 2004 document validate the need for
its recommendation with respect to price fluctuation saying:
This clause has been inserted in preference to the sample given in FIDIC
Part II to provide a more explicit statement of the formula and include the
concepts of a family of formulae to cater for different types of work,
broken down into formulae for the various currencies of payment.
The MDB Harmonized Condition has, in addition to this, a provision for time
extension for any delays incurred due to these changes in the laws.
Our objective was to identify the difference in the selected Standard Conditions
of Contract and assess the impact of such differences. Focusing on the selected
areas we tried to analyze the differences of the Standard conditions in our desk
study and field survey culminating with the feedback from the questionnaires
we gathered. We consequently reached the following conclusions and
recommendations.
Building Contract Claims and disputes – Dennis F. Turner and Alan Turner
1999
Contracting for major projects: eight business levers for top management
Christof von Branconia,b, Christoph H. Lochc, International Journal of Project
Management, 2003
Statutory reform of aspects of construction law in Australia, PAUL BICK
Construction Management and Economics (1997)
Construction contracts: the cost of mistrust, Ramy Zaghloul*, Francis
Hartman, International Journal of Project Management, 2002
Topic
Comparison of Local Vs. International Conditions of Contract for construction works
Goal
To improve the regulatory framework of the Construction Industry with respect to Standard
Conditions of Contract
Context
Ethiopia is among the least developed countries in the world which are dependent on
foreign aid to carry out large construction projects. Several donors are involved in the
financing of such projects in our country which has led to differences in regulatory and
planning frameworks adopted by each donor agency. Such framework differences are also
manifest in General Conditions of Contract adopted, not only between local and
international General conditions of contract but also among those adopted by particular
donors. This has created several problems like duplication of efforts, the need to adapt to
different states of mind for different conditions of contract, lack of capacity, long and slow
decision making processes etc.
If efforts are put into harmonization of these differences, as is the recent practice worldwide,
developing countries such as our country can benefit through minimizing difficulties. This
thesis is therefore based on this contextual background and aims to undertake research on
the comparison of various standards of conditions to identify their differences and assess
their impacts.
Research problems
Problem statement
Improving the regulatory framework of the construction industry with respect to the
Standard Conditions of Contracts.
Research questions
o Which clauses of the Standard Conditions of Contracts differ in cases of local and
international projects?
o What are the impacts of such differences on the construction industry?
Concept
The topic is related to Contract Management concepts with a specific consideration of
Conditions of Contracts including:
o Definitions and interpretations
o Contract documents
o Obligations, Rights and Defaults of parties to the contract
o Construction Works
o Measurement Certificates and Payments
o Alterations and claims
o Surety and Settlement of Disputes
o Others
Objective
To identify differences and assess impacts with the sub-objectives of
o Comparing the local and international Standard Conditions of Contract,
o Assessing impacts in selected case studies,
o Analysis with the context of literature reviews
o Recommendations relevant to the context.
Processes
o Definition of topic
o Formulating proposal
o Conceptual review formulation
o Context development
o Research Instrument
o Sample identification
o Data collection
o Analysis
o Thesis writing
Theoretical Review
May 25, 2006
Guidance Two and ½
3 June 8, 2006
Student Pres weeks
June 23, 2006
Go Ahead
Contextual Development
June 8, 2006
Guidance One and ½
4 June 30, 2006
Student Presentation week
July 5, 2006
Go Ahead
5 Presentation - July 5, 2006
Research Instrument and Sample
Identification
June21, 2006
6 Guidance One week
June23, 2006
Student Presentation
June23, 2006
Go ahead
Data Collection July 7, 2006
7 Two weeks
Analysis
July 7, 2006
Guidance
8 Two weeks July 21, 2006
Student Presentation
July 21, 2006
Go Ahead
Presentation
9 -
* The total estimated cost is to be covered by the joint account of the researching students.
Further attempts will be made to secure financial and other assistance from the Department
of Construction Technology and Management and other companies.
We have based our research on MoWUD’s 1994 Edition instead of the newly
revised edition because it is the one being applied in the industry. However, we
will eventually incorporate the provisions under the new MoWUD document in
the conclusion of our thesis work
The goal of our study is to improve the regulatory framework of the construction
industry with respect to these Standard Conditions of Contract. We have
consequently conducted a desk study in which we have attempted to identify
differences in the aforesaid Standard Conditions of Contract. Accordingly, the
following conditions were identified as major differences and we have
concentrated on these in our questionnaire:
Powers and obligations of the Engineer
Variation
Procedure for Claims and settlement of disputes
Time related clauses
* Errata: please replace the citation 'World Bank documents' with ' FIDIC MDB Harmonized
Construction Contracts, 2005'.
1. The three standard Conditions have different provisions for the need for
approval of the Engineer's authorities. FIDIC has left such clauses open when
referring them to the particular conditions while MoWUD states which
authorities need to be approved by the Ministry. The World Bank on the
other hand classifies the authorities into those that have been deemed
approved by the Employer whenever the Engineer exercises it and those that
need the specific approval of the Employer before the Engineer can take
action.
Why?
2. FIDIC and World Bank Standard Conditions have clauses which provide for
instructions in writing and provide time frames that apply to all conditions
(FIDIC 7 days' timeframe and World Bank 2 days). MoWUD, on the other
hand has separate provisions for instructions in writing for individual clauses
such as Variation (with specified timeframes of 7 days for confirmation and
14 days for Engineer's contradiction), Boreholes and Exploratory Excavations.
If Yes, Why?
If No, Why?
3. The World Bank has an expressly stated clause for the Replacement of the
Engineer and the rights of the Contractor to this end. This provision is not as
expressly stated in both FIDIC and MoWUD Standard Conditions.
What steps do you follow if and when replacing the Engineer while using
FIDIC and MoWUD Conditions of contract?
4. Both FIDIC and World Bank have explicit provisions for the Impartiality of
the Engineer (Determination). There is no explicit provision concerning this in
the MoWUD standard condition?
Do you think the clause for Impartiality of the Engineer is relevant and
applicable in practice?
5. FIDIC and World Bank Standard Conditions expressly state the Engineer’s
right to change any specified sequence or timing of construction under the
Rights to Vary Clause. Such explicit provisions are not present in MoWUD.
What has been your practice concerning change to the sequence or timing
of construction?
6. FIDIC states that a suitable rate and price for the varied works can be set after
consultation by the Engineer with the Employer and Contractor. In the event
of disagreement, the Engineer shall fix such other rate or price as in his
opinion.
The MoWUD Standard Condition, on the other hand, states that the
Contractor shall give the varied rate to the Engineer and the Engineer shall
give is comments on the varied rate from the Contractor and forwards the
document for approval to the Ministry of Works and Urban Development.
How do you view the application of the FIDIC and MoWUD provisions in
the context of Ethiopian law that has granted such authority to MoWUD?
If Yes, Why?
If No, Why?
II. Variation
1. The World Bank is the only one among the three Standard Conditions which
has explicit provision which details the Contractor’s right to contradict
variations (Sub-Clause 13.1). Such detailed provisions are not present in
FIDIC and MoWUD Conditions.
What steps do you follow to apply this provision while using MoWUD
Conditions of Contract?
1. The MoWUD standard condition has a simplified and shortened clause for
procedure of claims. FIDIC and World Bank have expressly stated clauses
which detail the procedure to be followed in claims.
2. When disputes arise between the Employer and the Contractor, FIDIC and
MoWUD stress the involvement of the Engineer to settle the dispute before
commencing arbitration. Under the MoWUD Standard Conditions, disputes
shall be referred to the Ministry of Works and Urban Development as an
arbitrator or elects other arbitrators.
In the World Bank Standard Conditions, if the Engineer does not respond
within the timeframe, either Party may consider that the claim is rejected by
the Engineer and any of the parties may refer it to the dispute board. The
dispute board comprising of three people should be appointed by the parties.
If this doesn’t bring about agreement, both parties shall attempt to settle the
dispute amicably before the commencement of arbitration.
Why?
If Yes, Why?
If No, Why?
If yes, how?
Are there any differences in the Conditions of Contract which you believe are of
paramount impact but have not been incorporated in this questionnaire? Please
kindly state those below along with their impact if possible.
Question 2
o the most appropriate way of presenting contractual conditions for
instructions in writing
FIDIC……………………………………… 33%
MoWUD…………………………………....67%
o Are the timeframes provided adequate?
Yes……………………………………… 80%
No…………………………………......... 20%
Question 3
Provision for Replacement of Engineer to be included in future
No problem has been encountered…………………74%
because of absence of such provision
Question 4
Impartiality of the Engineer
Engineer is in favour of Employer.……………………. 73.34%
Poor……………….. ………………..46.67%
No comment……………................. 13.33%
I don't know………………..….......... 40%