PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to focus on the Fédération Internationale des Ingénieurs‐Conseils (FIDIC) White Book standard form of building contract. It tracks the changes to this contract over its four editions, and seeks to identify their underlying causes.Design/methodology/approachThe changes made to the White Book are quantified using a specific type of quantitative content analysis. The amended clauses are then examined to understand the nature of the changes made.FindingsThe length of the contract increased by 34 per cent between 1990 and 2006. A large proportion of the overall increase can be attributed to the clauses dealing with “conflict of interest/corruption” and “dispute resolution”. In both instances, the FIDIC drafting committees have responded to international developments to discourage corruption, and to encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution. Between 1998 and 2006, the average length of the sentences increased slightly, raising the question of whether long sentences are easily understood by users of contracts.Research limitations/implicationsQuantification of text appears to be particularly useful for the analysis of documents which are regularly updated because changes can be clearly identified and the length of sentences can be determined, leading to conclusions about the readability of the text. However, caution is needed because changes of great relevance can be made to contract clauses without actually affecting their length.Practical implicationsThe paper will be instructive for contract drafters and informative for users of FIDIC's White Book.Originality/valueQuantifying text has been rarely used regarding standard‐form contracts in the field of construction.
The paper describes the main features of the 1999 edition of Fidic’s Red Book, possibly the most commonly used standard-form construction contract in international projects. The paper is addressed to construction professionals who already have an understanding of English construction contracts but have not yet looked into Fidic contracts. The 1999 Red Book is for use when the contractor has been given the design by the employer. The contract features general and particular conditions, the latter of which have to be drafted by the parties before the contract is entered into. A typical feature of the 1999 Red Book is the role of the engineer. Whether he has to act for the employer or whether he has to make a fair determination depends on the matter in question. There are two striking differences from the contract JCT SBC 2005 regarding claims of the contractor. First, only the 1999 Red Book contains strict time bars. Second, the clauses which contain events that justify claims are spread out over the whole contract and not contained in comprehensive lists of events. New features are clause 13.2 on value engineering and clause 20 on the impartial dispute adjudication board.
Freelance procurement expert, Bucharest, Romania
Contribution by Peter M. ElliottWith reference to Hillig et al. (2010) I suggest that it would have been more appropriate to compare the Fidic '99 suite of contracts with NEC3, rather than the Joint Contracts Tribunal (JCT) contracts, as NEC3 is designed for civil engineering works as is Fidic '99. Furthermore, the suite should be considered as a whole, including the recent Gold Book, rather than concentrating on one form. Clauses from different documents in the suite can replace the standard clauses in another version without compromising the integrity of the contract. Thus the ad hoc dispute adjudication board (DAB) specified in the Yellow Book can be replaced by the full-time DAB in the Red Book, if appropriate.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.