Australia | Publication | May 2020
The International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) recently published guidance for its contract users which is aimed at helping them manage some of the situations that are arising across the world as a consequence of the current pandemic. The new guidance sets out typical scenarios which serve as a helpful aide-memoire of points for contractors and employers to consider as they try to avoid disputes and manage issues as they crop up.
The comments made in FIDIC’s COVID-19 Guidance Memorandum (“Guidance”) are general and broad in nature and do not relate to any particular type of project, legal system or jurisdiction. The Guidance looks at certain contractual mechanisms found in the main (unamended) FIDIC forms and advises parties to obtain specific legal advice in relation to their projects and contract terms. The Guidance also needs to be considered in the light of the governing law of any given contract, the positions being taken and policies being adopted by the relevant governments (at both national and local levels) and international organizations.
FIDIC’s Guidance is focused on its main ‘Books’ – its Red (RB), Yellow (YB), Silver (SB), Green (Green Bk), Pink (PB), Gold (Gold Bk) and the Emerald Book (EB) – and, in relation to the main construction contracts, both the 1999 edition, as well as the recent 2017 suite.
The Guidance puts forward seven scenarios which could arise on any given project and looks at the remedies that might be available to the parties. Our table below highlights the issues and considerations set out in the Guidance.
In the introduction, the document provides a bold statement as to FIDIC’s approach to contract procurement, project management and dispute avoidance:
The Guidance also highlights FIDIC’s Golden Principles which we outlined in our Overview of FIDIC 2017.
As a prelude to the COVID-19-related scenarios, the Guidance reminds FIDIC users that:
In relation to each scenario outlined below, the parties must remember the importance of complying with all communication obligations (the giving of notices and keeping of records) in a timely fashion in accordance with the contract terms.
| COVID-19-related project scenario | Possible contractual remedies | |
| 1. |
Government (national/local) does not issue new legislation/regulations stopping construction works/activities on sites. Due to health and safety measures being implemented to stop transmission of the virus, the contractor faces difficulties:
|
Time: The contractor may explore
Which provide for EOT entitlement in cases of “Unforeseeable shortages in the availability of personnel or Goods (or Employer-Supplied Materials, if any) caused by epidemic or governmental actions” (RB 2017 wording). Under SB 2017, the contractor is entitled to EOT only in the event of Unforeseeable shortages in the availability of Employer-Supplied Materials, if any, caused by epidemic or governmental actions. There is no similar provision under SB 1999 as it is a Contractor’s risk under this Book. There is no similar provision under Green Bk 1999 but SC 6.1(h), 7.3 and 10.4 could be investigated. Money: The above provisions only give entitlement to EOT; there is no mention of financial remedy, which would depend on particular circumstances and whether the contractor can establish entitlement to financial compensation elsewhere under the contract or at law. |
| 2. |
Government (national/local) does not issue new legislation/regulations stopping construction works/activities on sites. Due to health and safety measures being implemented to stop transmission of virus, the contractor suffers delay which is caused by the authorities (for example, the authorities make repeated health and safety inspections of the site). |
Time: The contractor may be entitled to an EOT under
Provided that conditions set out in the sub-clauses are fully satisfied. Money: Regarding any financial entitlement, the same comment applies as in Scenario 1 above. |
| 3. |
Government (national/local) has issued a change in the law (CIL) which restricts construction works/activities on sites. The contractor is still able to proceed with works – but suffers delay and/or additional cost as a result of the CIL. |
What constitutes a CIL in the relevant country? CILs may include specific COVID-19-related measures affecting construction projects (examples include social distancing, supply of face masks and hand sanitizers, alternative arrangements for transportation, facilities, working hours for staff and labour). Obtain expert legal advice on what particular events constitute CILs (for example, whether they include the introduction of new laws, modification of existing laws, judicial interpretation of laws or official governmental interpretation of laws). FIDIC’s broad definition of “Laws” means that emergency laws/decrees being issued in different jurisdictions around the world are likely to constitute CILs. This definition also extends to cover regulatory actions from “any legally constituted public authority” and can therefore apply to national parliamentary acts and state-wide actions as well as municipal orders at local levels. In relation to CILs, the contractor may look to
|
| 4. |
Government (national/local) has issued order(s)/decree(s) that prevent construction works/activities on sites. Such order(s)/decree(s) may include lockdowns, curfews or quarantined areas (that become inaccessible). It becomes impossible to carry on with the works on site and the contractor (and possibly even the employer) is unable to perform its obligations under the contract. |
Consider whether Scenario 3 above in relation to CILs applies. Alternatively, consider whether the scenario invokes the Force Majeure (in the 2017 suite, an “Exceptional Event”) provisions: whether the event/circumstance is one which:
Consider the following FIDIC clauses:
The above clauses give examples of what might qualify as Force Majeure/Exceptional Event. The examples at the beginning of SC 19.1/SC 18.1 are of man-made events; the last example covers “natural catastrophes.” Pandemics and local authorities/governmental actions are not specifically listed. A government ban on construction activities may enable a party to argue Force Majeure/Exceptional Event, but it would still need to pass the test in the clause such that the party arguing so “could not reasonably have avoided or overcome” the event. A successfully claimed Force Majeure/Exceptional Event excuses performance of the said prevented obligations, provided the correct notifications have been given:
Time: The contractor may be entitled to an EOT for any resulting delay:
Money: Financial entitlements are more likely to flow from CILs (see Scenario 3 above) than from Force Majeure/Exceptional Events. |
| 5. |
Government (national/local) has issued order(s)/decree(s) that prevent construction works/activities on sites. Such order(s)/decree(s) may include lockdowns, curfews or quarantined areas (that become inaccessible). It becomes impossible to carry on with the works on site and the contractor (and possibly even the employer) is unable to perform its obligations under the contract. Can the contractor turn to Clause 17 (1999 – Risk and Responsibility/2017 – Care of the Works and Indemnities) in search of financial compensation (in addition to seeking an EOT)? |
This Scenario builds upon Scenario 4 above. Under Clause 17 of both the 1999 edition and the 2017 suite, a pre-condition to relief is damage or loss to the works. It is unlikely that the pandemic will cause loss or damage to the “Works, Goods or Contractor’s Documents”. Clause 17 is therefore unlikely to apply to Scenario 5. It is more likely that the consequences of the pandemic will delay and disrupt the project, for which the FIDIC forms provide remedies in Clause 19 (RB 1999, YB 1999, SB 1999 and PB) and Clause 18 (RB 2017, YB 2017, SB 2017, EB and Gold Bk), as outlined in Scenario 4 above. |
| 6. |
The contractor is able to proceed, but the pandemic is having an adverse impact on the progress of the works (this Scenario encompasses Scenarios 1, 2 and 3 above). Government (national/local) does not issue new legislation/regulations stopping construction works/activities on sites. But, due to health and safety measures being implemented to stop transmission of the virus, the contractor:
OR Government (national/local) has issued a change in the law (CIL) which restricts construction works/ activities on sites. The contractor is able to proceed with the works, but suffers delay and/or additional cost as a result of the CIL. Under Scenarios 1, 2 or 3, can either party turn to Clause 19 Force Majeure (1999 edition or PB)/Clause 18 Exceptional Events (2017 suite or EB)/Clause 18 Exceptional Risks (Gold Bk)? |
In each of Scenarios 1, 2 and 3 above, the performance of obligations under the contract will become harder and more onerous, but will not necessarily be prevented. It is likely that the contractor will able to continue on site and reasonably overcome the events contemplated. Scenarios 1, 2 and 3 are therefore unlikely to qualify as Force Majeure/Exceptional Events. Where the employer/engineer suspends part or all of the works (under Clause 8), as a precautionary measure, this is unlikely to result in Force Majeure/Exceptional Event (particularly in the absence of a CIL), but the contractor would be able to look to the remedies available under SC 8.9 of RB 1999, YB 1999, SB 1999 and PB, SC 7.3 and 10.4 of Green Bk, SC 8.10 of RB 2017, YB 2017, SB 2017 and EB, and SC 9.8 of Gold Bk. In addition:
|
| 7. |
There is no direct impact on the contractor’s operations, but the employer (or the employer’s representative/engineer) is working from home. In this scenario, there is no CIL and no real impact on the availability of personnel or on the supply chain. However, members of the employer’s/employer’s representative’s/engineer’s organisation are working remotely and away from the site. As a result of this, the contractor suffers delay/additional cost because of slow decision-making. |
Time: The contractor may turn to provisions of the contract that provide an EOT entitlement in the event of delay, impediment or prevention caused by or attributable to the employer/employer’s representative/engineer:
|
The challenges that all businesses face as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic mean that contract terms need to be examined carefully in light of the facts of each transaction. The provisions dealing with the following matters are of particular importance:
In addition, parties are asked to look at the broader picture. This includes a consideration of wider issues such as the following:
A number of coronaviruses are already endemic in the human population. COVID-19 could become the next one. Managing projects, avoiding disputes and crafting bespoke arrangements that meet the challenges ahead is now more important than ever before.
Contributors: Joanne Emerson Taqi, Nicki Milionis, Kylie Lightman
Norton Rose Fulbright’s national construction and engineering team is one of the largest leading practices in the market. Asia Pacific’s preeminent companies choose our team for its transactional experts, project delivery service, highly specialist disputes practice and outstanding track record. Unlike many project teams, our experienced team provide an end-to-end service across the lifespan of construction and infrastructure projects, advising from front-end procurement strategy and contract negotiation and preparation, through to project delivery, claims and disputes. With deep experience advising on large-scale infrastructure, property, energy and resources projects, we offer clients a legal team with unrivalled strength as well as access to specialists in other areas including planning, environment, real estate and insurance. Should you require assistance on your projects, please feel free to reach out to a member of our national team below.
Publication
In this edition of Regulation Around the World we review recent steps that financial services regulatory authorities have taken as regards investment research.
Publication
In recent years, an important question has arisen in relation to the voluntary carbon market (VCM) as it continues to expand: How do we elevate and maintain its integrity?
Publication
On 16 April 2024, the Hon Tanya Plibersek MP, the Minister for the Environment and Water (the Minister) announced progress on the package of reforms to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC Act).
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023