+ 44 (0)20 8614 6200
info@corbett.co.uk
+ 44 (0)20 8614 6200
info@corbett.co.uk
Cornerstone Seminars
FIDIC
Knowledge Hub
+ 44 (0)20 8614 6200
info@corbett.co.uk

FIDIC 2022 Reprints: 10 Key Areas Of Change In The FIDIC Red Book 2017

FIDIC ‘launched’ the FIDIC 2022 reprints at the FIDIC International Construction Users’ Conference 2022, in London. The reception to the changes was mixed – some embraced the clarity; others questioned the significance and cost. This article draws your attention to 10 of the key areas of change in respect of the FIDIC Red Book 2017 including the definition of Claim, matters to be agreed or determined, the definition of Dispute and Exceptional Events.

By |January 18th, 2023|Adjudication / Dispute Boards / ADR, Design, Dispute Boards, featured, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off on FIDIC 2022 Reprints: 10 Key Areas Of Change In The FIDIC Red Book 2017

FIDIC contracts—introduction to the FIDIC Green Book 2021

This Practice Note is an introduction to the FIDIC Green Book 2021 (the Short Form of Contract). It is not a fully detailed clause-by-clause commentary. This article was first published by LexisPSL

By |January 10th, 2023|Adjudication / Dispute Boards / ADR, Arbitration, Delay, Design, Dispute Boards, featured, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off on FIDIC contracts—introduction to the FIDIC Green Book 2021

The Dangers of Employer Set Off in your FIDIC Contract: Suspension and Termination

Unfortunately, under the FIDIC Red and Yellow Books 1999, the right of an Employer to set off from an amount already certified in a Payment Certificate but unpaid is inexplicit. Once the Employer has a Sub-Clause 3.5 determination, it may ask the Engineer to deduct the amount determined from the next Payment Certificate. This is clear. But rather than rely on the Engineer, can the Employer instead, itself, deduct by way of set off from an amount already certified in a Payment Certificate but unpaid? This is not clear.

By |March 18th, 2022|Adjudication / Dispute Boards / ADR, Advisory Work, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off on The Dangers of Employer Set Off in your FIDIC Contract: Suspension and Termination

Jurisdiction, Admissibility and FIDIC

An issue that often arises in international arbitrations involving the FIDIC forms of contract is whether a claimant's failure to: (a) go through the dispute resolution provisions; or (b) comply with a time-bar clause gives rise to a question of admissibility or jurisdiction. Put another way, if a claimant has failed to issue a notice of claim within 28 days or failed to refer a dispute to a DAB, does the arbitral tribunal have jurisdiction to make an award on the merits or should the arbitral tribunal make an award stating that it lacks jurisdiction?

By |November 6th, 2020|Adjudication / Dispute Boards / ADR, Arbitration, Delay, Dispute Boards, featured, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off on Jurisdiction, Admissibility and FIDIC

Cherry Picking FIDIC 2017

Much has been said about the new Red, Yellow and Silver Books 2nd Editions launched by FIDIC in December last year. The most obvious comment has been about their size, almost 50,000 words, which is some 60% longer than the 1999 forms. Although the 1999 forms were not perfect, most regular users seem to be agreed that they did not need 20,000 words to fix the issues. This consensus led this author to attempt to cherry-pick the good bits from the 2017 forms and to propose amendments to add the good ideas to the 1999 forms. The amendments apply to all three forms unless it is indicated otherwise.

By |October 29th, 2018|Adjudication / Dispute Boards / ADR, Arbitration, Delay, Dispute Boards, Drafting, featured, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off on Cherry Picking FIDIC 2017

FIDIC’s Sub-Clause 20.5 – A Condition Precedent to Arbitration

The 1999 FIDIC forms of contract contain a number of obligations and/or conditions precedent that require (a) a party to give notice of a claim (Sub-Clauses 20.1 and 2.5); (b) refer the claim to the Engineer (Sub-Clauses 20.1 and 3.5); and (c) submit the dispute to a Dispute Adjudication Board (“DAB”) (Sub-Clause 20.4). If either party gives a notice of dissatisfaction relating to the DAB’s Decision then Sub-Clause 20.5 provides that: “Where notice of dissatisfaction has been given under Sub-Clause 20.4 above, both Parties shall attempt to settle the dispute amicably before the commencement of arbitration. However, unless both Parties agree otherwise, arbitration may be commenced on or after the fifty-sixth day after the day on which notice of dissatisfaction was given, even if no attempt at amicable settlement has been made.”

By |December 16th, 2015|Adjudication / Dispute Boards / ADR, Arbitration, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off on FIDIC’s Sub-Clause 20.5 – A Condition Precedent to Arbitration

Can a party ignore FIDIC’s DAB process and refer its dispute directly to arbitration?

If there is no DAB appointed by the parties to a FIDIC 1999 contract, may disputes be referred directly to arbitration under clause 20.8? This issue has troubled many in the industry – and has now been considered in English and Swiss courts.

By |November 17th, 2014|Adjudication / Dispute Boards / ADR, Dispute Boards, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off on Can a party ignore FIDIC’s DAB process and refer its dispute directly to arbitration?
Go to Top