Patterson, R (2009) Using NEC contracts to manage risk and avoid disputes. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 162(4), pp. 157-167. ISSN 17514312
Abstract
NEC contracts provide an excellent basis to encourage and support risk management through all stages of any project or service provision. Partly because they are good for risk management, NEC contracts have anecdotally helped avoid disputes. After more than 12 years of use for possibly billions of pounds worth of work in probably tens of thousands of projects in more than 20 countries there remains only one piece of case law relating to the use of the NEC. The aim of this paper is to explain how NEC contracts can be used to reflect the particular risk allocation intended by the parties to the contract through the use of the options within the contract. It then explains the key tools and processes in the contract for the ongoing management of risk, including the NEC's 'Risk Register' and the allocation of risk in quotations for the effects of events at the client's risk.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contracts and law; procurement; project management |
| Index terms: | risk register, option, project management, risk allocation, risk management, case law, dispute |
| Subjects: | decision analysis, dispute resolution, project management theory and practice, financial risk, risk assessment, legal systems |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Project Management, Risk Management, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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