Introduction
The NEC3 introduces the concept of a collaborative approach to problem solving by directing the contractor and the project manager to first discuss the different ways in which risks and the possible compensation event that may eventuate can be managed before the project manager instructs the contractor to submit alternative quotations.

In terms of clause 62.3 of the contract, the contractor is obliged to submit a quotation within three weeks of being instructed to do so. Once the quotation has been submitted, the project manager must reply within two weeks. Provision is made in this clause that he may reply in one of four ways, one of which is to instruct the contractor to submit a revised quotation.

On the face of it this process may be abused by a recalcitrant project manager by instructing the contractor to submit repeated revised quotations for the compensation event ad infinitum.

The relevant provisions of the NEC3
Let’s examine the provisions of clause 62 (quotations for compensation events) more carefully to establish how this possibility of repeated quotations may be curtailed.

Firstly, in terms of clause 62.1 the project manager and contractor have to discuss ways of dealing with the compensation event. If the project manager has instructed the contractor to submit quotations then there are two routes the contractor will follow:

• Submit the required quotations to the project manager;
• Alternatively, the contractor may submit quotations for other methods of dealing with the compensation event which he considers practicable.

Secondly, and flowing from clause 62.1, the contractor has to submit the quotations within three weeks of being instructed to do so as required by clause 62.3. This clause 62.3 states that one of the replies from the project manager to the quotation may be in the form of a request to the contractor to submit a revised quotation. This is where the provisions of the contract become somewhat problematical and the contractor may, on the face of it, find himself in the abovementioned never ending process of submitting revised quotations.

This request to submit revised quotations is, to an extent regulated by clause 62.4. The project manager is entitled to instruct the contractor to submit revised quotations only after explaining his reasons for doing so to the contractor. Once he has explained his reasons the contractor has to submit the revised quotation within three weeks of the instruction to do so.

The question to be asked at this juncture is: ‘What if the project manager’s reasons are not worth the paper it is written on?’ In order to find the answer one has to read clause 62 as a whole and then look at other provisions in the contract to arrive at a proper interpretation. As stated earlier, clause 62.1 provides for a collaborative approach to dealing with compensation events. This is confirmed in clause 62.4 which requires an actual explanation by the project manager giving his reasons for calling for a revised quotation. These clauses incorporate the spirit of clause 10.1 (actions) which require the parties to work in a spirit of mutual trust and co-operation. Clearly, if the project manager gives a directive to the contractor without an explanation he has not acted in a manner as set out in the contract nor has he fulfilled the obligation to provide explanations required by clause 62.4.

Accordingly, the process where a contractor is requested to submit revised quotations should proceed along the following lines:

• the project manager and contractor discuss different ways of dealing with the compensation event (clause 62.1);
• the contractor submits a quotation as instructed (clause 62.1);
• if the project manager is of the view that he will require a revised quotation he should convene a meeting with the contractor within 2 weeks of the submission and explain his reasons to the contractor why he requires a revised quotation (clause 62.3);
• only then may the project manager instruct the contractor to submit a revised quotation (clause 62.4).

Conclusion- if the project manager acts in a manner contrary to the contract provisions
If the contractual process has not been followed properly by the project manager the contractor should refer the matter to adjudication and must do so within the time periods stated in the adjudication table under option W1 as follows:

• Dispute about: an action of the project manager (pleaded in the alternative, the project manager or supervisor not having taken an action) – between two and four weeks after the contractor’s notification of the dispute to the employer and the project manager, the notification itself being made not more than four weeks after the contractor becomes aware of the action.

Disclaimer: The content of this newsletter does not constitute legal advice. If you have a specific problem please contact MDA on 011 648 9500, at our Durban office on 031 764 0811 or by email on ncoertse@mdaconsulting.co.za