Skip to main content

Variations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 3939 Accesses

Abstract

When parties agree that a contract is to be implemented by a fixed date and by using specified methods, conduct by the employer which is authorised by the contract (e.g. issuing Variation orders, ordering extra work) surely cannot alter or nullify the agreed date for completion or other mutually agreed stipulations of the Contract. It is for that very reason that building contracts nowadays almost invariably contain express provisions making allowance for Variations. Under a FIDIC contract Variations are covered by Clause 13. The Clause covers both the authority of the Engineer and the Employer as well as the procedures for work being added, omitted, or changed from the original contract, either by initiative of the Contractor (Value Engineering) or the initiative of the Engineer. Also the effects of any Variation order on time and money are expressly stipulated. The Engineer’s power to issue instructions which constitute a Variation is often conditional on prior approval by the Employer. However, if there is any such restriction which must have been disclosed in the Particular Conditions and the Engineer issues an instruction which constitutes a Variation, the Contractor may rely on it, because according to Sub-Clause 3.1, whenever the Engineer exercises a specified authority for which the Employer’s approval is required, then the Employer shall be deemed to have given his approval.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Pacific Associates v. Baxter [1990] 1 QB 993 at 1010, confirmed by the House of Lords in White v. Jones [1995] 2 AC 257.

  2. 2.

    I.R.C. v. Williams [1969] 1 WLR 1197.

  3. 3.

    Neodox Ltd v. Borough of Swinton and Pendlebury (1958) 5 BLR 38.

  4. 4.

    Beaufort Developments (NI) Ltd v. Gilbert-Ash (NI) Ltd and Others [1998] 2 All ER 778, 798j.

References

  • Ashworth A (1998) Civil Engineering contractual procedures. Addison Wesley Longman, Essex

    Google Scholar 

  • Furst S, Ramsley V (2006) Keating on construction contracts, 8th edn. Sweet & Maxwell, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewison K (2004) The interpretation of contracts, 3rd edn. Sweet & Maxwell, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Totterdill BW (2006) FIDIC user’s guide, 2nd edn. Thomas Telford, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendtland H (2008) in: Bamberger, Roth (eds) Commentary to BGB, 2nd edn. C.H. Beck, München

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Axel-Volkmar Jaeger .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jaeger, AV., Hök, GS. (2009). Variations. In: FIDIC - A Guide for Practitioners. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02100-8_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics