The legal status of construction work programme in the construction industry
In construction contracts, a programme is usually produced to record the sequence of work. Most standard forms of contract neither state it to be part of the contract document nor give guidelines of how to prepare a work programme and the form it should take. The form does not clearly defined the pr...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2009
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/12421/6/SitiFairusOthmanMFAB2009.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | In construction contracts, a programme is usually produced to record the sequence of work. Most standard forms of contract neither state it to be part of the contract document nor give guidelines of how to prepare a work programme and the form it should take. The form does not clearly defined the programme’s role and it does not state that there is a clear obligation to proceed in accordance with the programme. The aim of this research is to identify the legal status of a work programme and whether it is contractually binding or not and whether it can be used as an evidence in establishing variations, assessing extension of time and in determining a contractor’s employment. The research is based on literature information about construction work programme, its provisions for international and local standard forms of contract and the legal implications in court cases where work programme was considered an important document in the judgment. From the research, it is found that a contractor has to have at least an updated documents about its project’s progress, minimally in the form of critical path analysis and logical link for a causative event of delay to be proven. If the programme includes a method statement then that stated method may become the specified method of working. This entitles the contractor to a variation if the specified method is required to be changed. It is also found that the subcontract programme had no contractual effect as to original main programme. But non-performance under its obligations may be treated as a repudiatory breach and claims for damages is liable due to parties determination. Lastly the research found that his entitlement to recover losses due to the delay or awardment of an extension of time can be considered the compensation under the contract. All the existence and extent of these obligations are determined by the terms of the contract. |
|---|