Methods of documentation and administration of building contracts

Because of the complex, though fundamentally similar, nature of many building contracts it is common practice in Australia, as in other countries, to use standard forms of contract. These are lengthy and detailed documents which have been developed and refined over a number of years. In the following chapters, the E5b contract is discussed specifically. The principles apply to building contracts in general. A standard form of contract has the advantage that it is generally accepted by builders and its implications are (or should be) familiar to the signatories - builder and proprietor (acting on the advice of his architect, if not fully aware of the meaning of the contract). Such a form is also more likely to be legally viable than a document specially drawn up by the proprietor's solicitor. In the past its contents have been agreed upon by a committee composed of representatives of the Royal Australian Institute of Architects and the Master Builders' Federation of Australia, Inc. Currently, the Building Owners' and Managers' Association of Australia Limited is also represented on the committee. The disadvantage of the standard form is that, because it is so commonly used, familiarity breeds complacency. Many builders and architects may assume that the document is adequate and appropriate as it stands, without being fully aware of their consequent rights, duties and obligations. They may also fail to realise that its conditions are intended to apply to building contracts in general, not to lay down specific administrative rules to cover every situation. Three areas in particular - rise & fall, extensions of time and variations - are likely to produce many of the difficulties and disputes which often arise during the administration of a contract. This may be either because the contract is not specific or because its effects are regarded by the builder, architect or proprietor as inequitable. In many cases it is possible to predict situations which may lead to disputes and to do this before the contract is signed. It is the architect's responsibility to do so in his client's interest. Facing up to such problems and attempting to avoid them by incorporating appropriate administrative procedures in the contract documents are seen as logical and necessary extensions of the architect's role of quasi-arbitrator.