In the fourth part of our series on contract management pitfalls, we look at the risks arising from varying the terms of construction contracts.
You might think that having negotiated a contract, it would not be necessary to vary the terms during delivery of the works or services. However, there are occasions when it is appropriate to vary contractual mechanisms. For example, adjusting key performance indicators (KPIs) and incentives, or adjusting the final account mechanism if works are due to continue beyond the expiry of a term service contract.
We often see disputes arise out of a misunderstanding of the consequences of a variation, or where one party wishes to revert to the original contract terms.
The case of Mears Limited v Shoreline Housing [2015] 1396 (TCC) highlights some of the difficulties that can arise. In this case, the parties agreed to change the schedule of rates contained within the contract (with the new rates referred to as the “Composite Rates”), but they didn’t agree a formal contractual variation. A dispute arose as to the correct value due to Mears, with Mears calculating payment based on the Composite Rates and Shoreline applying the rates tendered by Mears in the schedule of rates. The Technology and Construction Court agreed with Mears that the Composite Rates applied, requiring Shoreline to pay the higher rates.
How to manage the risk
There are two ways to mitigate the risks of contract variations:
It is also important to consider whether the variation has any implications under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. Seeking support from legal advisers to review (or draft) the variations and comment on the procurement implications of any variation, can also assist in managing the risks.
If you have any questions regarding the issues raised in this briefing or would like to find out more about our bespoke client training programme, please contact Kieran Binnie or Andrew Lancaster.
Recent data reports that the financial cost of clinical negligence claims runs to a total of £83bn, but what is the real cost of clinical negligence?
Would you know how to manage an escalating social media storm? Are you confident in your plans and policies for responding to, and managing, a prominent ‘scandal’ in your charity?
The Civil Partnership (Opposite-Sex Couples) Regulations 2019 were made on 5 November 2019 and came into force on 2 December 2019.
HMRC’s approach to underpayment of the National Minimum Wage (NMW) is getting tougher and shows no sign of abating.
HMRC’s approach to underpayment of the National Minimum Wage (NMW) is getting tougher and shows no sign of abating.
Now 2020 is here and we have welcomed in the new decade, it’s time to welcome in changes regards the contents of employee’s statement of particulars.
In December 2019, the Care Quality Commission brought its first prosecution against a local authority
The CIL was introduced under the Planning Act 2008 and the CIL Regulations 2010, which came into force in April 2010. CIL is a non-negotiable tax charged by local authorities on new developments.
The Court of Appeal’s recent decision is likely to be unwelcome news for any cash-strapped councils seeking to fund the costs of taxi enforcement through licence fees.
It is important that trustees are aware of the law relating to people who are transgender and those who identify as non-binary so that they can ensure compliance.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.