Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
I attended SCA last April 2013 and thank you for your valuable sessions. It provided me with more knowledge in Contracts
Administration.
And since then, this training had opened an opportunity for me to work in a prestigious Company in Abu Dhabi.
We have a current situation now, wherein the project has been delayed due to the clients' always putting it on
hold. If delay claims will be applied will bank guarantee & Insurances also be extended?
Yes, but it is better to ask from the client whether or not to extend them.
Regards,
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971 50 4588949 F +971 4 3378668
Thank you to enlighten us with your comments and suggestion on the above.
Regards,
Geraldine
I hope that you are doing well and wish you good health!
Regards,
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
Sisira
----- Original Message -----
From: eva olofernes
To: "Prof. Sam" <sam99@eim.ae>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 07:00:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Query
Thank you very much for Q&A documents you've sent me. I was not able to raise a question during
your recent SCA Seminar in June 2014 here in Doha. I would be very glad if you could help me with
the below scenario;
The Contract is a fixed lump sum. The Contractor has submitted its IPA
003 that claims for the whole amount of GRs for items which are not time
related i.e. PII, Performance bonds, Insurances etc. (priced as lump sum in
the contract). The contract says that monthly payments for Prelims and
GRs shall only be made for those costs which have been properly incurred
and payment for all items with unit of measure "Lot", "LS", or "item" shall
be upon completion of the work. Is it right that payment can be made for
such items considering the above? If so, what are the things that they
need to provide?
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971 50 4588949 F +971 4 3378668
Thanks a lot!
Best regards,
Eva Olofernes
Dear Sir,
1. What evidence we should give under Clause 18.1a Proof of payment of insurance premiums.
3. Clause 18.3 Isnt it covered under CAR policy? You can either have a separate policy for this or it could be
combined with the CAR.
4. Client has deleted Clause 12 (completely) under particular conditions. So. How do we evaluate Variations (if
any)? As we discuss in detail during the Advanced Class, Clause 12 is not only to value variations but also to
value original scope of work. If Clause 12 is deleted then the Contract is silent as to how original scope of work
and variations should be valued, which is an ambiguity which should be resolved in favour of the Contractor and
therefore the original scope of work and the variations should be valued using the existing rates/prices and where
they are not applicable then using new rates and prices to reflect a fair value of the work and variations.
Regards,
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971 50 4588949 F +971 4 3378668
Kind Regards
Gamlath W
Dear Sir,
A variation has been issued to change all plant type A to plant type B, which costs $15 each.
In this case what will be the correct calculation against the variation issued?
1. Omit $100 (BOQ amount of the affected item) and add $225 (Type C $15 x 15) This is
correct if there was no place given in the BOQ to price the Dwg/BOQ errors (but Omission
of $100 is not arrived at by taking the amount for this item but by dividing 100 by 15 to
arrive at a new rate and then multiplying by the actual quantity)
2. Omit $ 150 (Type A $10 x 15 drawing) and add $225 (Type C $15 x 15) This is correct if
there was a place given in the BOQ to price the Dwg/BOQ errors.
Can the contractor argue pertaining to point 2 above saying it is not justifiable to omit more than he
has allowed for a particular item of work? If a place was given in the BOQ to price the Dwg/BOQ
errors, then he cannot argue as suggested. (we discussed in detail this issue during SCA Session
1)
Or
In an opposite situation where the drawing shows less than that in the BOQ, if the consultant propose
to omit total amount in the BOQ (as in point 1 above):
Can the contractor argue saying it is not justifiable to omit more than shown in the drawing? Yes & No.
See 1 & 2 above.
Regards,
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971 50 4588949 F +971 4 3378668
Dr Sam,
I was one of your student who attended to your classes in Dubai. Now I work in SL and got a question related to
my project. I jotted down the details below. please comment if you have time.
Question - Subcon claims since the contract says the duration as 9 months, it governs and what mentioned in
BOQ as 12 months is ignorable, since document order in FIDIC says contract comes first.
Even in a re-measurable contract, there are items which should not be re-measured (especially the contractors
risk items). Either the Method of Measurement (according to which the BOQ was prepared) or the Pricing
Preamble to the BOQ (or at least the item description itself) should have stated whether this particular item
should be re-measured. If it can be established that this item is re-measurable, then the rate for the item would
be 225k divided by 12. The priority of the documents is inapplicable as the quantity of 12 could have been given
for contingencies of over-stay at site beyond the Time for Completion for the purpose of attending to snags etc.
Therefore the actual number of months should be multiplied by the aforesaid rate.
If it can be established that this item is not to be re-measured, then the payment would be a lump sum of 225k
irrespective of the actual number of the months in the Time for Completion (subject to any additions if EOT with
costs is awarded).
If a doubt exists as to whether or not the item should be re-measured, then it would be resolved in favour of the
Subcontractor (i.e. by valuing using one of the above two methods which is more favourable to him).
Regards,
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971 50 4588949 F +971 4 3378668
regards,
Nadeesha..
Dear Professor,
Trust this email finds you well. I am one of your students from SCA Alumni and looking for your clarification for
following issue.
This is related to a re-measured contract. There is a BOQ item for supply and install fire
hydrants.
The BOQ description was for 100mm dia system while the tender drawings has clearly
mentioned the fire hydrants should be in 160mm dia PVC pipe with 150mm dia gate valves.
This discrepancy has never been queried at the tender stage.
The contractor has installed 160mm dia system at site to the Engineers satisfaction. Now
during the final re-measurement stage the contractor is looking for a rate revision.
Since the contract is re-measurable, is the contractor eligible for a rate revision? Or can we
reject their request for a rate revision based on the following?
(a) the drawings have the higher priority over BOQ. No.
Being a re-measurable contract, there was no obligation on the part of the tenderer/Contractor
to price the item for any other scope other than a 100 mm system. For the constructed 160
mm system there is no applicable rate in the BOQ and therefore a suitable rate should be
agreed. Due to the error in the documents (for which the Contractor is not responsible), the
Employer may have to pay more than what he would otherwise have had to pay, but he can
recover it by suing the QS consultant who made the error in the BOQ.
Regards,
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971 50 4588949 F +971 4 3378668
Please comment.
Best Regards,
Pradeep
Hi Prof Sam,
2. However, we found out that there are details in the Contract drawings and we can
measure the provisional item in detail.
Can the Client argue that the Contractor has already considered the Provisional sum
Item since there are actually detail drawings on the IFC, therefore they can delete the
Provisional sum as a whole.
Also the issue is an ambiguity which should be resolved in favour of the Contractor.
Regards,
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971 50 4588949 F +971 4 3378668
Regards,
A re measurable contract was agreed for duration of 200 calendar days. A daily penalty was
calculated based on the formula 10% X contract value / 20% duration = 60000.
The client did assign additional works, accordingly the contract price has been changed to
(X+X1) and the duration to ( D+D1).
1- Can the daily penalty be changed due to additional works? Please note that no
new agreement was made to adjust the penalty figures. If there are no definitions
given for the expressions contract value and duration, then there are ambiguities
as to whether or not they are of fixed/variable nature, which ambiguities should be
resolved in favour of the Contractor and therefore it is very likely that an
Arbitrator/Court would interpret them as of fixed nature and therefore the daily
penalty rate of 60,000/- would be fixed.
2- The contractor argued that the original scope was finished; accordingly the delay
penalty should be calculated on the outstanding works and not the total. Is he right in
his claim? If the original scope is of stand-alone nature and could have been put to its
intended use prior to completion of the additional work, and if the Client took-over
such work, then it is not subject to any penalty.
3- The contractor did not apply for a partial TOC as the contract does not state for
that. How the application of penalty will be calculated? This doesnt appear to be the
case, judging from Questions 4 and 5 below !
4- The client used part of the completed works without having TOC issued. How
the application of daily penalty would be calculated? Assuming
5- The client used part of the completed works having TOC issued. How the
application of daily penalty would be calculated? Assuming
Since this is for an on-going project please hide the sender details. This Q&A forum should
be used only for interaction of academic interests, and therefore advice should not be sought
for your projects. Such advice should be sought by your company under professional services
terms and conditions with our company.
Regards,
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971 50 4588949 F +971 4 3378668
Regards,
I write to clarify which quantity will govern in the assessment of variation in FIDIC form (lump sum/remeasurable
contract) if Contract BOQ and Contract Drawings are not the same in quantity and yet signed the contract
documents. Example, light fittings BOQ qty is 300 nos. and Contract drawings qty is 500 nos. And finally during
the course of construction they issue 600 nos as IFC2/IFC3 drawings. Which quantity will be taken in the re-
measurement assessment?
If the contract is Lump Sum type, then 500 Nos. is considered to be included within the Lump Sum Contract Price
and the remaining 100 Nos. would be paid as a variation. Variation would be valued using BOQ Rate if there was
a place provided in the BOQ to price quantity errors. If no such place was provided, then a new Rate would be
calculated by dividing the total amount of the Item by 500 (If the Contractor is making a loss due to this lower
rate, then he should refuse to carry out the variation on the grounds that it is not necessary.)
If the contract is Re-Measurement type, then 600 Nos. would be valued using the BOQ Rate, for payment.
Regards,
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971 50 4588949 F +971 4 3378668
Please comment.
Kind regards
From: laeeqhassan@hotmail.com
To: sam99@eim.ae
Subject: FIDIC 1987-Clause 42, 67 and 53
Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 04:33:58 -0400
I have an interesting question. The Contractor has to give 28 days notice normally as per clause 53. Now there is
a scenario of delayed delivery of site possession to the contractor and clause 42 and 42.2 which concerns this
aspect says that the Engineer shall, after due consultation with the Employer and the contractor, determine EOT
and costs to be added to contract price with a follow up of notification to both parties.
My question is do you feel that still contractor has to give this 28 day notice?
For EOT Notice should be given within 28 days stated in 44.2 and for Costs Notice should be given within 28
days stated in 53.1
The second aspect for consideration is that contractor has nothing to do in such a delay case and wait for
Engineer's notification. Do you agree? No
The third aspect is if the Engineer only accord time extension but not costs, in that case what action can be taken
by the contractor? If the Notice is given in a timely manner and the claim has been submitted in a timely manner,
then refer the dispute for Engineers Decision under 67.1
Regards,
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971 50 4588949 F +971 4 3378668
Dear Sam,
3) According to addendum this page was revised to contain only 4 items and revised BoQ page was issued.
4) The Contractor had acknowledged the addendum in The Tender page of Volume 1 but had not used the revised
BoQ page.
5) When preparing the Contract Document the revised BoQ page was inserted but the Contractor had kept the
same page total as for 5 items.
6) In view of the above, are we entitled for a saving for that one item priced in the tender. No.
The Lump Sum Contract Price is for the full scope of work and work cannot be re-measured by adding/omitting from
the Contract Price unless a Variation is instructed.
Regards,
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971 50 4588949 F +971 4 3378668
I am seeking your comments due different interpretation.
Thanking you.
Regards
Aslam
I was a part of the April 2012 SCA Alumni. I seek your kind guidance in resolving a very tricky situation that my
company is in. Actually, I now work for a Contractor. Due to the availability of drawings only for two facilities
during the inception of the project which comprise of 23 facilities (mostly similar). There was a written agreement
with the Client that the Project with facilities shall be concluded at an agreed Price of AED 133 Million (Lump
sum) of which 33 million were allocated as Provisional Sums for all the external hard landscaping, road
infrastructure, MEP provisional works and Back of house finishes etc. So LOA was received based on an agreed
Lump sum price per facility and 33m PS being separately identified in the total agreed Lump sum figure of 133
Million for the entire project.
Although, External Hard landscaping was clearly identified as a Provisional Sum item, the cost consultant who
had provided to us the BoQ included the hard landscaping paviours in the List of items of the main scope and the
same was forwarded to our Estimation section for Pricing and they priced it as a main scope item (The rates had
to be indicated to arrive at the final agreed Lump sum Figure of AED 100 Million + 33 Million (PS)). Now when the
priced BoQ is already submitted back to the Cost Consultant with a copy to the Client, it is realized that the
external Paviours should have been left alone and shouldn't have been priced as this is a PS item fully, while the
associated amount around 1.30 Million Dirhams should have been re-distributed to the unit rates of the other
items.
Now when the hard landscaping package is finalized it is perceived that this item (concrete paviours) from the
main BoQ shall be considered under the omission list as this is a PS item, does it mean that we are bound to
lose around 1.30 million and there's no way out. I thought this should be communicated to the Cost Consultants
and the Client concurrently seeking their consensus to allow us to revise our unit rates in the main BoQ as
paviours is a part of the Provisional Sums and it's exclusion from the main BoQ without compensation would
mean a loss of AED 1.3Millions to my company. Could you kindly give comments to help us out and if we could
proceed like this and how could we make our case strong enough to defend our legitimate amounts.
Being a Lump Sum Contract, work should not be re-measured. 100 Million is for the original Scope of Work
excluding hard landscaping (which is covered by PS).
Moreover Instructions cannot be issued to omit BOQ Items ! As we discuss in detail during SCA Session 1 ( if
you wish to educate your colleagues and also counterparts working for Consultants and Employers, please
encourage them to attend the SCA)
Regards,
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971 50 4588949 F +971 4 3378668
Thanking you in anticipation of an early response.
Yours faithfully,
Zakiuddin.
I apologize that I'm not able to attend to the previously held advance training program
due to busy schedule. I hope I can attend the next advance session. Your Place is
confirmed in the Advanced class starting on 15th August 2014.
Regards,
Prof. Sam.
Prof. Indrawansa Samaratunga PhD, DSc
FRICS, FAIQS, FIQSSL, FCIArb, FCIOB, FCMI, FASI, FBEng
Chartered Surveyor, Chartered QS, Chartered Manager, Chartered Builder
Arbitrator / Mediator - London Court of International Arbitration
Arbitrator / Expert - Dubai International Arbitration Centre, UAE
Construction Law & Dispute Resolution Advisory Board member
of British University in Dubai
PO Box 23461, Dubai, UAE. T +971 50 4588949 F +971 4 3378668
I'm looking forward to receiving your response at the soonest time possible.
Thanking you.
Eltrih
Class of SCA May 2014