Quantcast
Channel: ReachBack by BuiltIntelligence - Recent questions and answers in NEC3 and NEC4 Contracts
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 3204

Answered: NEC ECC: Further procedure still not clear for dispute

$
0
0
Peter,

It is still not clear how the demolition / re-routing works have been implemented.  Although you say it is an option under the main contract, the fact that the works have been valued as a BoQ and accepted as a CE, leads me to believe that this is an Option B rather than A as previously stated.

If the main contract Works Information mentions that you have to remove or divert existing services then you would need to consider this requirement (if it is stated as such) and whether it relates to the main contract scope or whether the wording takes account of the demolition / re-routing works option, thereby included as a general statement but not a specific requirement.

You don't say how the statement of a 'clean area' is included in the contract documents or whether this is an implied obligation on the Employer to provide this.  

In the absence of clarity of the actual wording it would be difficult to give any advice as any subtle alterations will influence the outcome.

It looks like you are required to undertake this work in any case, so notifying a CE would not help to resolve the situation as it is not a 'change' but a required clarification.  You could notify an ambiguity or inconsistency under clause 17 if there are conficting statements, which would require a PM response.  If the matter requires a change to the Works Information to resolve it (a CE) then you won't be time barred as the PM should notify this consequent to their response to clause 17.

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 3204

Trending Articles