The claim orientation dissection in Iran and FIDIC consultant's contracts

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 - Assistant professor of project management group,F aculty of fine art, University of Tehran

2 M.S. of construction & project management, Shahid Behehsti University of Tehran

Abstract

Extensive use of new project delivery systems and engineering important role followed by contractual types developments inside or outside of country increased the importance of providing identical internal and international contracts. These contracts prepared a standard framework for project risk and responsibilities allocation for both consultants and clients. This research aims to study general condition of Iran and FIDIC consultant's agreement to determine challenging clauses and conflict orientation in these contracts.
Accordingly, after reviewing Iran and FIDIC client/ consultant agreements, comparison between contractual clauses has been carried on and important clauses with indemnity provision has been separated; which based on, claim source breakdown structure (CSBS) produced. Compensate receiver and indemnity type for those clauses has been set according to Iran and FIDIC consultant's general condition; followed by comparing between two contract clauses and analytical analysis. Consequently, a complete list of important clauses with indemnity provision related to consultants and clients determined and classified in terms of cost, time, scope and contractual claim's reasons. The results show higher contractual risks and most claims ensue of cost's conflicts for consultants in internal contracts. Recommended suggestion for Iran and FIDIC client/ consultant agreement are provided based on this study results and expert's ideas.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

[1] Ghorbani, A., Shakeri, E. (2005). “Investigation on contractor claim's reasons and controlling procedure in civil projects",  M.S. thesis, faculty of civil engineering and environment, Amir kabir university. p. 82
[2] Khaniki, M. (2012). “Consultant's role in projects", cultrul studies and humanities research center.
[3] Taheri khoram abad, D., Rezvanian, O. (2014). “Claim management comparison overview in FIDIC contracts", Contract Journal. P. 2.
[4] Brewer, G. (1983). “What is a claim? "  Contract Journal. p . 14
[5] Strategic planning and controlling deputy, (2012). “Technical and administrative system", www.mporg.ir  
[6] Technical and administrative system (1997). “General condition and agreement of typical consultant contracts (issue 3418)".
[7] Strategic planning and controlling deputy, (2013). “Consultant's supervision services fees and selection instructive guidline".
[8]  ACSE.  (1995). Construction bid ability, Constructability and Operability.
[9] Consultant and contractor's office (2007). “Consultants qualification regulation", Strategic planning and controlling deputy.
[10] Parchami Jalal, M., Taghi Zade, E., Saghi, B., (1012). “Risk allocation study in contractors general contracts (three parties)", M.S. thesis, P. 39-50.
[11] Khanzadi, Sh., Yousefi, M., Dabirian, M., (2010). “Heirarchy and sensetive analysis on important claim reasons", M.S. thesis, P. 48-52.
[12] International Federation of Consulating Engineering (FIDIC), www.fidic.org
[13] FIDIC, (2017). “Client/Consultant Model Services Agreement (White Book)- 5th Edition (white book)", Iran consulting engineering group.
[14] Parchamin Jalal, M., Jafari, S., (2014). “Common contractual contractor's claims analysis in B and DB contracts of urban deep homing", M.S. thesis.
[15] Parchamin Jalal, M., Hosseingholi, M., (2013). “Engineering challenges analysis of partnership group for DB prohects and offering solutions", M.S. thesis.
[16] Talkhabi, H., Golabchi, M., (2014). “Contractor claim reason analysis in civil DB underground projects", tunneling and underground space engineering journal, volume 3, No. 1.
[17] Ebrahimi, N., Borzoie, S., Ghavami, Sh., (2014). “Consultant's services contracts and their general challengs", 9th international confrence of project management.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 29 January 2017
  • Revise Date: 01 October 2017
  • Accept Date: 19 October 2017

Share

How to cite

Statistics