Engineering & Construction Contract & Subcontract Formation
What is a Construction and Engineering Contract?
Any contract is an agreement between two parties which can be legally enforced.
How do we know whether the contract is legally enforceable?
In order for a contract to be enforceable there are five essential elements which need to be present;
There must be a clear intention for the parties to create a binding obligation.
The parties must clearly be capable of forming a legally enforceable relationship. Incorporated companies, partnerships and individuals all have the capacity to create a contract. In contrast infants or insane persons do not.
This is probably the most important element. Its presence is fundamental to the formation of a legally binding contract.
In order for an adjudicator, the courts, an arbitrator, or any other party with jurisdiction to determine that agreement has been reached a clear offer and unconditional acceptance needs to be present.
4. Certainty of Terms
It is not necessary that every term is agreed for example a building contract could be let using a bill of quantities based on approximate quantities. However, there must be general agreement as to the terms of the contract.
Under English law consideration may be defined as the giving of a benefit of some kind to the other party with whom you have or wish to contract. Usually this takes the form of money in commercial contracts although it could be quite literally be given in any form.
In a contract between a Main Contractor and Subcontractor, consideration is the pledge of money by the Contractor on the one hand and the supply of labour, plant and materials by the Subcontractor on the other.
Consideration is not necessarily required where a contract is executed as a deed i.e. there may be one way obligations by one party with no benefit being provided by the other.
Under Scottish law voluntary obligations assumed with the absence of any consideration may be enforceable.
Offer Acceptance And Counter-Offer In Construction and Engineering Contracts
Invitations to Tender
An invitation or a request for a quotation is not regarded in English law as an offer. A decision taken to submit a tender does not form a legally binding Contract. A quotation is nothing more than an offer.
Whilst you are not under any obligation to accept an enquiry or invitation to tender there may be commercial pressures which may encourage you to comply with the request. For example, the fear of being removed from a standard tender list.
Enquiries and invitations to tender are termed “invitations to treat” meaning that they are an offer to negotiate. Suppliers literature, price lists and the like are invitations to treat and do not bind the parties in any way.
Forms of Offer
Fee quotations, estimates and quotations are all forms of offer. The terms of the offer can be numerous and can be varied if a quotation is being sent to a number of parties, for example: Specialist Contractors, invariably receive invitations to tender from several Main Contractors on the same project. In this situation there is nothing to prevent the subcontractor from sending out different offers to each of the Contractors concerned. Indeed, unless the terms of all the enquiries received are identical (which is highly unlikely) the offers sent out should vary.
Expiry and Withdrawal
It is possible to restrict the time scale in which an offer is open for acceptance by simply referring to a date in the terms after which the offer will expire. This makes the offer incapable of acceptance after the date of expiry.
Under English law; an offer may be withdrawn at any time even if the offer contains a statement or pledge to hold the offer open for a specified period.
A contract is formed when one party makes an offer which is unconditionally accepted by the other.
Acceptance may be issued in writing, given orally or may be deemed to have taken place because of the conduct of the party in receipt of the offer.
A purported acceptance which contains terms different to the offer is not acceptance. This is called a counter offer which may be accepted by the other party or subject to a further counter offer.
The Last Shot Principle
In practice legal disputes concerning the Construction and terms of a particular contract abound, consider the following typical scenario;
Following numerous and difficult negotiations an order is placed by telephone subject to written confirmation. The written order then has terms and conditions on the back (often in small print). Assuming there is the incorporation of these terms by direct reference on the front of the order then the person receiving the order responds by sending out a similar document indicating different terms and conditions upon which they are prepared to do business. This leads to subsequent exchanges of correspondence and by this stage the parties can not agree on what are the terms of the eventual contract.
At one time the courts appeared to resolve this issue by adopting what has been called the ‘last shot principle’. In other words, the courts would look at the last offer which had been accepted in an unqualified way and this would then determine the conditions of contract. However, this principle cannot be regarded as a hard and fast rule which applies in every case. The court will endeavour to establish and give effect to the intention of the parties, but it will not create an agreement where one does not exist.
The Problems Of Construction Contract Formation (The “Battle Of The Forms”)
A good example of how complex the analysis can be is to be found in the case of Chichester Joinery Ltd -v- John Mowlem plc (1987). Briefly the series of events was as follows;
Chichester sent out an open quotation for joinery based on their standard conditions;
Mowlem sent Chichester an enquiry seeking a further quotation based on Mowlem’s conditions;
Chichester sent a letter to Mowlem restating Chichester’s conditions;
Mowlem sent an order to Chichester based on their Conditions.
Chichester sent Mowlem an acknowledgement of order based on Chichester Conditions;
Mowlem subsequently accepted Chichester’s joinery when delivered to the site.
The judge accepted that it was a very difficult case and stated that it highlighted the risks facing parties who sought to impose their own respective conditions rather than using some well established form of contract.
However, he held that there were a series of offers and counter offers with Chichester’s acknowledgement of order being a counter offer and the acceptance by Mowlem of joinery constituted an acceptance of Chichester’s counter offer.
In the leading practitioner’s book ‘Chitty on Contracts’ the discussion on the ‘Battle
of the Forms’ concludes with the following statement:-
“Thus it is possible by careful draftsmanship to avoid losing the battle of forms, but not (if the other party is equally careful) to win it …The most that the draftsman can be certain of achieving is the stalemate situation in which there is no contract at all.”
Incorporation of Construction Contract Terms by Reference
It is common practice to incorporate terms and conditions of contract by reference to them without there being any signed form of contract. Whilst this is not a particularly good practice it is of course expedient and provided it is done carefully and clearly there should be few problems created by such a practice. One danger is if the words used do not make it clear precisely which form of contract, or indeed how much of it, is being incorporated. This can cause enormous problems.
While the courts will not make contracts for the parties, they will do their best to define the true presumed intention of the parties and to identify the actual terms of the agreement notwithstanding the use of inappropriate language.
Conflicting Terms In Construction Contracts
The terms and conditions in a construction contract can come from a number of sources.
These are the elements of the contract specifically agreed by the parties. They may have been set out in writing or agreed orally. Such terms typically include price, timing, the services to be provided and the like.
In the absence of express terms, the parties will usually, and if they do not the courts will recognise implied terms which have been incorporated either unilaterally or mutually by the parties concerned.
For example if the contract is for the construction of a house and there is no express term confirming that the building Contractor will obtain payment for the services provided then there will clearly be an assumption by the Employer that he will have to make payment for the services provided and an assumption by the Contractor that he will receive payment.
In cases of dispute where the parties are unable to agree on the implied terms of a contract e.g. the standard and quality of design, workmanship and materials the courts will do this for the parties concerned. In doing so the courts will seek and find terms implied which allow the contract to operate with business efficacy (as expected in the normal course of business dealings).
If the scope of the contract is referred to in acts of parliament then, subject to any express exclusion in the written terms of the contract, these provisions will be implied by the courts.
Common Law Rights
These are rights and obligations which will be implied by the courts. These provisions follow from the courts decisions in previous disputes in which a precedent is set. Such rights could relate to the interpretation of a specific clause of a standard contract or may introduce completely new rights and obligations of which the contracting parties are ignorant.
If ambiguities arise during the tender period these should be dealt with at this stage and the basis upon which the offer is made should be made absolutely crystal clear. This may sound like a case of teaching grandmothers to suck eggs but we are constantly being asked to resolve disputes which have arisen because this fundamental principle has not been applied.
In regard to ambiguities which are only discovered once the contract has been formed it may be possible to rely on a principle or rule of contract interpretation referred to as contra proferentum. This principle is admirably described in the following extract from learned text on contractual matters;
“If there is an ambiguity in a document which all the other methods of interpretation have failed to resolve so that there are two alternative meanings to certain words, the court may construe the words against the party seeking to rely on them and give effect to the meaning more favourable to the other party.”
D Keating – Building Contracts 7th edition
It is submitted that the rule may apply as between different sections of the same document which have the effect of giving the document two alternative meanings. However, the rule does not apply universally in all situations and the construction of the contract terms as a whole requires careful consideration of all documents and the circumstances in which they came into being.
PRIORITY OF DOCUMENTS
The question often arises as to which contract document is to be given greater weight where it conflicts with another contract document.The different standard forms have different policies with regard to this question. For example, DOM/1 states at clause 2;
2.1 Nothing contained in any descriptive schedule or other like document issued in connection with and for use in carrying out the Sub-Contract Works shall impose any obligation beyond those imposed by the Sub-Contract Documents.
2.2 If any conflict appears between the Sub-Contract Conditions and the Appendix, then the Appendix shall prevail. If any conflict appears between the terms of Sub-Contract DOM/1 and the Numbered Documents, the terms of Sub-Contract DOM/1 shall prevail. If any conflict appears between the provisions of the Main Contract and the terms of the Sub-Contract Documents, the terms of the Sub-Contract Documents shall prevail.
On the other hand the ICE Conditions establishes no priority of documents. It states “The several documents forming the Contract are to be taken as mutually explanatory of one another…”
Where the Contract is silent as to priority of documents the general legal rule is that a more detailed document will override a more general document with which it conflicts. Applying this rule it is perfectly possible for a clearly drafted Specification Clause to override Standard Conditions of Contract, as the Specification would be deemed to be the more particular document. By the same token detailed working drawings would override a specification.
It is important to note that the “Contract” will also comprise documents referred to in the documents which themselves comprise the contract i.e. if there are references to British Standards and Codes of Practice (which there usually are) in either the Specification or the Bills of Quantities, then those Codes and Standards become part of the Contract.
We provide a unique alternative to other, more conventional and expensive ways to access contractual advice, and it isn’t limited to just solving your current problem. As a StreetwiseSubbie Gold Buddy you can use the free contractual advice to which you are you are entitled, to resolve any other commercial or contractual matter that you might be struggling with, and use it to help protect your business now and in the future.
Construction Contracts and Subcontract Documents
At Streetwise we are always looking to solve Specialist Contractor’s problems. That includes subcontractors problems with contracts, sub-contracts and other contractual documents.
If you have an urgent problem about a contract or contract documents and you need advice please call us now for free initial advice** on 01773 712116 or email: firstname.lastname@example.org and one of our team of highly experienced and qualified Consultants will be able to help.
Specialist Contracting can be a complicated business and it’s no surprise that at some point you are going to come across contract documents, sub-contract documents and other contractual documentation that is difficult to understand. You may also be asked to work in accordance with contracts or sub-contract documents that you haven’t heard of or used before.
If it is out of hours or you would rather leave a question why not use Ask Streetwise
What is different about a Construction Contract?
A variety of factors make a construction contract different from most other types of contracts. These include the length of the project, its complexity, its size and the fact that the price agreed and the amount of work done may change as it proceeds.
The structure may be a new building on virgin ground. It may involve thedemolition of an existing building and its full reconstruction. It could involve partial demolition and rebuilding, or the refurbishment and extension of anexisting building or structure.
This may be mostly below ground (in which case it is engineering) or above ground (in which case it is building). Building, however, includes foundations and other underground works.
A building contract can consist of activities and services carried out both above and below ground.
In Modern Engineering (Bristol) Ltd v. Gilbert-Ash Northern  AC 689,Lord Diplock at 717B described a building contract as:
‘an entire contract for the sale of goods and work and labour for a lump sumprice payable by instalments as the goods are delivered and the work done. Decisions have to be made from time to time about such essential matters as themaking of variation orders, the expenditure of provisional and prime cost sumsand extension of time for the carrying out of the work under the contract.’
It is important to realise that Lord Diplock was referring to a contract mad eusing a standard form of building contract. Such contracts usually make provision for interim payments at regular intervals as the work proceeds, whereas acontract that is described as entire is a product of the common law.
It may make provision for stage payments, but in essence, it requires the contractor to complete all its work before any entitlement to payment arises.
A modernexample of such an entire contract is Discain Project Services Ltd v. Opecprime Developments Ltd  EWHC Technology 450.
The carrying out and completion of this contract (whether made using a standard form contract or entire) differs from other manufacturing processes. HHJ Newey OR in Emson Eastern v. EME Developments (1991) 55 BLR 114 described the differences at p. 125, within the context of practical completion of the work:
‘I think the most important background fact which I should keep in mind is that building construction is not like the manufacture of goods in afactory. The size of the project, site conditions, the use of many materialsand the employment of various kinds of operatives make it virtually impossible to achieve the same degree of perfection that a manufacturer can. It must be a rare new building in which every screw and every brush of paint is absolutely correct.’
There is no special body of rules that applies to such contracts, whether they are described as building, engineering or construction contracts.
Lord Reid said in Modern Engineering that where the parties enter into detailed building contracts there were ‘no overriding rules or principles covering their contractual relationships beyond those which generally apply’.
This principle was supported by LordLloyd of Berwick in Beaufort Developments (NI) Ltd v. Gilbert-Ash (NI) Ltd UKHL  1 AC 191 where he stated that:
‘Standard forms of building contracts have often been criticised by the courts for being unnecessary obscure and verbose. But in fairness one should add that it is sometimes the courts themselves who have added to the difficulty by treating building contracts as if they were subject to special rules of their own.’
The fact that the ordinary rules of the law of contract apply is subject to an important qualification. Legislation passed following the recommendations of theLatham Report (Constructing the Team, 1996) has treated construction contracts asa special category requiring statutory intervention.
The introduction of HousingGrants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, part II (hereafter HGCRA 96)has also altered fundamentally the allocation of risks in construction contracts. Allparties before entering into contracts have to consider how they will deal with the legislation. It also provides a much wider definition of what, for the purposes of the legislation, is a construction contract.
Section 104(1) of the HGCRA 96 states that a ‘construction contract’ includes:
- the carrying out of construction operations• arranging for the carrying out of construction operations by others, whetherunder a subcontract to him or otherwise• providing his own labour, or the labour of others, for carrying out construction operations.
- Section 104(2) extends the definition of a construction contract to any agreement to carry out architectural, design or surveying work, or the provision of advice on building, engineering, interior or exterior decoration, or the laying out of landscape.
Note that a contract of employment is specifically excluded from the statutory definition. This definition is much wider than that given by Lord Diplock above.
It includes the carrying out of design activities and the giving of advice, so widening the range of activities covered by the legislation.
Construction operations are further defined by Section 105 as including:
- all normal building and civil engineering works, including operations suchas scaffolding, site clearance and painting and decorating as well ascontracts for repair and maintenance
- consultants agreements on construction operations
- labour-only contracts
- contracts of any value.
Certain contracts are excluded from the operation of the Act: see Section105(2). Whilst the exact reason for this is open to debate it could be argued that they did not suffer from the same ills identified by the Latham Report.
The petrochemical and process industries are excluded, and so are contracts concerning the supply and fixing of plant (including supporting steelwork). These activities are not classified as ‘construction operations’.
The off-site manufacture of components to be incorporated into the construction work is also excluded, and so are contracts with residential occupiers (see Section 106).
There is however, a substantial body of case law resulting from contracts with residential occupiers. These involve either the use of standard forms of contracts or other contracts that make specific provision for adjudication.
In a number of cases the meaning of construction operations has been considered. Homer Burgess Ltd v. Chirex (Annan)  BLR 124 held that pipework was part of a pharmaceutical plant and not a construction operation.
By contrast, in Palmer Ltd v. ABB Power Construction (1999) BLR 426 the subcontractor work was held to come into the definition. This was so despite the main contract work being outside the definition.
Staveley Industries Plc v.Odebrecht Oil & Gas Services (2001) 98 (10) LSG 46 held that structures on the sea bed below low water mark are not part of the United Kingdom for theapplication of the Act.
There was a special requirement s107, (subsequently repealed in 2011) that the contract had to be in writing, and whether the agreement is in writing has been an issue in many references to adjudication.
In Grovedeck Ltd v. Capital Demolition Ltd  BLR 181 an oral agreement was entered into. The parties went to adjudication under the Scheme for Construction Contracts despite theprotests of one side that the Act did not apply. HHJ Bowsher QC refused to enforce the adjudicator’s award, finding that there was no written contract.
The Court of Appeal in RJT Consulting Engineers Ltd v. DM Engineering (Northern Ireland) Ltd (2002) EWCA Civ 270 had to consider the meaning of Section 107. All three judges interpreted the section as requiring the express terms of the agreement to be in writing, not the agreement itself.
Note also that private finance initiative contracts and finance agreements are excluded from the legislation on grounds of policy.
Risk Allocation In Construction Contracts
Like all contracts, construction contracts are about the prior allocation of risk.Windward (1991) draws attention to the construction industry’s need to makea profit on the employment of capital:
‘If risk is an essential ingredient of the system which generates your profit,it is inevitable that there must be a structure for resolving disputes. It bringsthe relationship of the disputants back into balance so that life can resumeits normal course.’
Windward’s reference was primarily to arbitration, the main method of dispute resolution prior to the introduction of adjudication. It is of course a matter of debate whether the introduction of statutory adjudication by the HGCRA 96 achieves that balance between disputing parties. It was conceived by the Latham Report as essentially a ‘quick fix’ in that it was intended to resolve disputes as they arose rather than at the end of the project, this being the usual practice before its introduction.
Standard forms of contract try to allocate risk equitably between the parties. In essence, the payment provisions of the HGCRA 96 can also be described as an attempt to introduce a measure of equity into the contractual relationship between contractor and subcontractor. Risks are varied in construction contracts, and include many factors that can affect the progress of the work.
1 The unforeseen:
(a) unexpected ground conditions(b) unpredicted weather conditions(c) a shortage of material(d) a shortage of skilled labour(e) accidents, whether by fire, flood or carelessness(f) innovative design that does not work or proves impossible to construct.
2 The length of the contract.
Projects vary in the time needed for completion, from days to years. During that time the risk allocation agreed at the time of contracting can change substantially. This is especially so with regard to the availability of materials and its costs.
A contractor may have ‘bought’ the job because work was scarce at the time and the price of components low.
3 The number of participants,
The number of participants and parties in the project and the corresponding length of contractual chain cause their own problems. The risk of insolvency increases, the longer the chain.
4 Particular Relationships
The particular relationship (often referred to as a triangular relationship of costs, time and quality) in which conflict is inherent. Contracting parties have different perceptions of how these factors of their relationship interact.
5 Design and Workmanship
The interaction between liability for defective workmanship and for faults in design. The Latham Report in item 3.10 identified the lack of coordination between design and construction as a common source of dispute. Much of the innovation in procurement systems of recent years stems from creating ways of minimising the effect of this clash.
Why use a Standard Form of Construction Contract?
There has been a proliferation of standard forms in the construction industry in recent years, and there are many books available on specific forms of contract. It is not intended to compare those forms here or discuss their similarities or differences. There are, however, many advantages to be gained by using a standard form of contract.
Some advantages are:
1 The standard form is usually negotiated between the different bodies that make up the industry. As a result the risks are spread equitably.
2 Using a standard form avoids the cost and time of individually negotiatedcontracts.3 Tender comparisons are made easier since the risk allocation is same for each tenderer. Parties are assumed to understand that risk allocation and their prices can be accurately compared.
Some disadvantages are:
1 The forms are cumbersome, complex and often difficult to understand.
2 Because the resulting contract is often a compromise, they are resistant tochange. Much-needed changes take a long time to bring into effect.
A construction contract is best described as a complex web of competing interests. A particular problem in construction contracts is that there is little interest in building long-term relationships. With the growth of partnering it is possible to argue that much has changed. It is argued that contracts such as the New Engineering Contract (NEC), now renamed the NEC Engineering and Construction contract, provide flexibility and simplicity.
The traditional contract is of great importance in understanding the problemsand complexities of construction contracts. Only by analysing the relationshipbetween the employer and the contractor is it possible to understand the problems that other forms of procurement try to resolve. At the heart of the traditional contract lies the conflict between design on the one hand and workmanship on the other.
That conflict is complicated further by the need to allocate rights to third parties.
The Traditional Construction Contract
In such a contract the employer contracts with an architect or engineer to carry out the design. The architect or engineer, acting as the agent of the employer, supervises the construction of that design. The contractor enters into a contract with the Employer.
There is no guarantee given by the employer to the contractor that the design can be built.
In carrying out the work, the contractor employs both subcontractors and suppliers of services, goods and equipment.
The Tendering Process
Whatever the method of procurement adopted, the tendering process in the United Kingdom is based on competitive bidding. To ensure transparency in this process the National Joint Consultative Committee (NJCC), an organisation consisting of the major professional bodies involved with construction, has produced codes of procedure.
The first step in this type of tendering is an advertisement in the technical press calling for expressions of interest. Parties can obtain the documents needed from the body placing the advertisement or its agents. The advertisement usually contains a brief description of the location, the type of work being proposed, the scale of the project and the scope of the proposed work. Interested contractors are invited to apply for the details.
The main disadvantage of this type of tendering is that it is indiscriminate in its approach, costly and likely to attract inexperienced tenderers. Local authorities have in the past tended to favour this method of procurement. Its use has been affected by European Directive 71/305/EEC 9 (as amended by directive 89/440/EEC), implemented in the United Kingdom by the Public Works Contracts Regulations 1991 (SI 1991/2680).
These were followed by a number of regulations aimed at opening the European construction market. For more details see Emden (Bartlett, 2001, p. 2009).
In public procurement this is the main form of selection. The financial thresholds change every two years. Because it applies to all public and local government projects, health authorities, police, education authorities and so on, it is therefore applicable to a wide range of projects.
Single-stage Selective Tendering
The NJCC code considers that this procedure is suitable for both private and public sector works. This procedure restricts the number of tenderers by preselection from either an approved list or on an ad hoc basis. A limited number (up to six) are selected on the basis of general skill and experience, financial standing, integrity, proven competence with regard to statutory health and safety requirements, and their approach to quality assurance systems.
Thereafter price alone is the criteria, the lowest tender being selected.
Two-stage Selective Tendering
The NJCC regards this as a suitable method where the early involvement of the main contractor is required before the scheme is fully designed. It enables the design team to make use of the contractor’s expertise. The contractor also becomes involved in the planning of the project at an early stage.
The first stage consists of the selection of the contractor on the basis of a competitively priced tender but with minimal information provided. The submission is on a basis of the layout and design of the works, clear pricing documents relating to the preliminary design and specification, and the conditions of contract. In the second stage the employer’s professional team collaborates with the selected contractor in the design and development of production drawings for the whole project.
A bill of quantities (or it may simply be priced on drawings and a specification) is prepared and priced on the basis of the first-stage tender.
If an acceptable sum is produced the contract documents are then prepared. This method is considered to be useful for building works of a large or complex nature, where the brief is unlikely to change. It is recommended for projects where the design and construction phases may overlap and the contractor’s design expertise can be utilised.
Design and Build or Turnkey Contracts
Design and build contracts, are also called turnkey contracts, which is a wider description of what the employer may expect (i.e. the employer puts the key into the door of the new factory and starts it up). The contractor’s price is to design and carry out and complete the works in accordance with the conditions of contract.
The tender includes the whole of contractor’s proposal including price and design. The NJCC Code of Procedure for selective tendering for design and build describes its code as a procurement method that combines the design and construction responsibilities.
Contracts are seldom entered into on this basis alone.
Parties may negotiate an extension to a contract, additional work outside the scope of the contract may be agreed, or additional work may be carried out elsewhere for the same employer.
A joint venture is where two or more companies pool resources for a project beyond the resources of the single company. It may be used on one project or the agreement may be for a specified period. The co-venturers accept joint andseveral liability for the project.
Other means of procurement
Various types of ‘procurement systems’ have evolved in recent years to deal withthe difficulties perceived within the traditional contract.
(a) Management contracting. Here the employer engages the management contractor to partake in the project at an early stage. Normally an experienced builder, the contractor is employed not to undertake the work but to manage the process. All the work is subcontracted to works contractorswho carry it out.
(b) Construction management. This differs from management contracting in that the employer enters into a direct contract with each specialist. The employer engages the construction manager to act as a ‘consultant’ to coordinate these contractors.
(c) Project management. The project manager is employed to coordinate all the work needed from design to procurement and construction on behalf of the client.
(d) Partnering. The rise of partnering in UK construction can be seen as a response to the widely held view that the industry was inherently flawed. After the boom times of the 1980s and subsequent recession of the early 1990s it contracted sharply. A culture of conflict persisted in the industry, with employers and contractors operating in a highly adversarial manner, with contractors taking on greater risks in a fiercely competitive market. In many cases, in order to secure contracts and survive, contractors had to tender at cost (or even less than cost), and recover margins through building claims into the contracting process and withholding payments to subcontractors (Critchlow, 1998).
The essence of any partnering agreement now involves a duty of good faith, mutual cooperation and trust between all parties involved in the construction process.
The Private Finance Initiative (PFI). The aim of the system known as PFI is to involve the private sector in the provision of public services. In essence the PFI contract is a concession granted by the public sector to the private sector. Theprivate sector company provides the vehicle by which the project company secures the finance to provide services for running the asset provided.
This may be a hospital, the provision of information technology projects and services, or the running of the London Underground. The purpose of private and public partnerships is to share the risk of the project, and PFI is at the moment the dominant method.
The Many Different Types Of Construction Contract
There are literally hundreds of different construction and engineering contracts and documents in use in the construction and engineering industries, e.g.
Association of Consulting Architects (ACA)
Association of Consulting Engineers (ACE)
British Electrotechnical and Allied Manufacturers Association (BEAMA)
British Property Federation (BPF)
Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB)
Civil Engineering Contractors Association (CECA)
Confederation of Construction Specialists (CCS)
Construction Industry Council (CIC)
Heating and Ventilation Contractors Association (HVCA)
Institution of Chemical Engineers (IChemE)
Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE)
Institution of Engineering and Technology/Institution of Mechanical Engineers (MF Contracts)
International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)
Joint Conts tribunal (JCT)
National Federation of Demolition Contractors (NFDC)
New Engineering Contract (NEC)
Scottish Building Contract Committee (SBCC)