Late disputes and the NEC3 Engineering and Construction Contract

Ndekugri, I (2016) Late disputes and the NEC3 Engineering and Construction Contract. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 169(2), pp. 65-76. ISSN 17514304

Abstract

Surveys show growing use of the third edition of the New Engineering Contract (NEC3) family of contracts. One of the reasons for project owners' choice of the NEC3 Engineering and Construction Contract is the avoidance of the risk of claims and disputes long after project completion. In several cases not involving NEC3 contracts, UK courts have been presented with difficult questions concerning adjudication after project completion and delayed reference of adjudicated disputes to the applicable final tribunal. This paper critically examines these questions, the courts' answers to them and their implications for the NEC3 family of contracts. It concludes that the drafters of future editions of the NEC3 Engineering and Construction Contract should consider provisions targeted at: ensuring that the test of awareness for the purposes of the clause 61.3 time-bar is on an objective basis; conclusive evidence clauses that impose a disincentive against seriously delayed challenges to assessment of compensation events and payment; and providing that the decision of an adjudicator becomes finally binding if the dispute decided is not referred to the tribunal within a stated period.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: contracting; contracts & law; disputes & arbitration
Index terms: arbitration, compensation, construction contract, adjudicator, New Engineering Contract, owner, dispute, tribunal, adjudication, evidence, survey
Subjects: contractual arrangements, practitioner, evaluation and assessment methods, contract type, sociology, dispute resolution, data collection methods
Topics: Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Legal Issues, Procurement
Descriptive scope: 4 PCEA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here