Dayworks refer to works executed on a time basis (e.g., labor and plant) with payment made according to predetermined rates rather than a lump sum or unit rate contract price.

Option A is incorrect. Even if a Daywork Schedule is not initially included, the dayworks Sub-Clause (e.g., Sub-Clause 13.7 in Red and Yellow Books, 13.8 in Silver Book 1999) still applies to dayworks ordered during the contract execution. The schedule facilitates pricing, but the Sub-Clause governs the method and conditions for dayworks.

Option B is correct. The dayworks Sub-Clause is applicable not only to traditional construction works but can also be applied to other types of works, such as variations or additional works that cannot be precisely measured or foreseen and are charged on a time basis.

Option C is incorrect. The dayworks Sub-Clause is used in all FIDIC standard forms (Red, Yellow, and Silver Books), not only for remeasurement in the Red Book. In the Yellow Book (plant and design-build) and Silver Book (EPC/turnkey), dayworks are similarly applicable for certain variations or unforeseen works.

Option D is correct. The Engineer (in Red and Yellow Books) or the Employer (in the Silver Book, where the Engineer’s role is limited) may instruct that a variation be executed on a daywork basis. This instruction is typically used when the scope or quantity cannot be reasonably pre-determined.

The Contractor’s obligation to submit progress reports continues until all outstanding work identified in the Taking-Over Certificate has been completed. The Taking-Over Certificate signals substantial completion but may allow for outstanding minor works. Reporting is essential to monitor progress on these outstanding works.

The Performance Certificate relates to final contract completion but reporting usually ends earlier only after all works are completed.

Therefore, Option D is correct.

When the Employer requests a proposal prior to instructing a Variation, the Contractor is typically required to submit:

A description of the varied work (Option A).

Details of resources and methods for carrying out the Variation (Option C).

A Programme showing how the Variation will be executed (Option D).

A description of the proposed design (Option B) is not always required as part of the Variation proposal, especially if the Variation is limited to changes in execution rather than design.

This statement is true. The FIDIC Yellow and Silver Books (2017 editions) include a clear provision that the Works, or the parts designed by the Contractor, must be fit for their ordinary purposes, reflecting the Contractor’s responsibility for design and performance. This introduces an express fitness-for-purpose obligation, which was less explicit in earlier editions.

This provision clarifies risk allocation related to design liability, ensuring that the Contractor is accountable for the fitness of the designed works unless otherwise specified.

Option D is correct because contract drafting should strategically allocate risks between parties based on who can best manage them and the Employer’s budget for risk and reward. Understanding risk appetite is key to tailoring FIDIC contracts appropriately.

Option A is exaggerated; while amendments can introduce issues, careful drafting can preserve benefits of standardization.

Option B is partly true but mixing arrangements is complex and not always straightforward.

Option C is incorrect; the Employer usually chooses the contract form.

The key requirement in this scenario is certainty of cost and time, particularly because the Employer intends to secure financing from a financial institution. Lenders typically require a high degree of predictability regarding project completion date and final contract price.

The FIDIC Silver Book 2017 (EPC/Turnkey Contract) is specifically designed for such situations. Under this form, the Contractor assumes full responsibility for both design and construction, as well as a significant portion of project risks, including many that would otherwise remain with the Employer under other FIDIC forms. This results in a lump-sum, fixed-price contract with greater certainty in final cost and schedule.

In contrast, the Red Book allocates design responsibility to the Employer and allows for more variability due to remeasurement and variations, making cost less predictable. The Yellow Book, although design-build, still allows more balanced risk sharing and potential adjustments, which can reduce price certainty compared to the Silver Book.

From a contract management perspective, the Silver Book is commonly used for privately financed infrastructure or projects requiring strong lender confidence, as it minimizes Employer risk and enhances bankability.

Therefore, for a hospital project requiring financial backing and maximum certainty in cost and time, the Silver Book is the most appropriate choice.

Under FIDIC 2017, Employer’s Claims are governed by Clause 20.2 [Claims For Payment and/or EOT]. The first procedural step is the submission of a Notice of Claim.

Option A is correct because the Employer must notify the Engineer of the event or circumstance giving rise to the claim. This notice must clearly describe the basis of the claim, including the relevant facts (e.g., delay, cost, or Defects Notification Period extension).

Option B is also correct. FIDIC 2017 introduces a strict 28-day time bar for both Parties. The claiming Party (including the Employer) must give notice “as soon as practicable” and no later than 28 days after becoming aware (or when it should have become aware) of the event. Failure to comply may result in loss of entitlement.

Option C is incorrect because it is irrelevant and misrepresents the structured claims procedure under Clause 20.

Option D is incorrect for the first step. While later submissions (fully detailed claim under Sub-Clause 20.2.4) require detailed particulars including contractual basis, the initial notice does not require full legal substantiation—only identification of the event/circumstance.

This structured two-step process (Notice → Fully Detailed Claim) is central to FIDIC 2017’s claims management system, ensuring early warning and proper administration of claims.

According to the FIDIC 2017 editions (Red, Yellow, and Silver Books), when the Contractor submits a revised programme, the Engineer or Employer has a limited time (typically 14 days) to review and raise any Notice of Non-Compliance if the programme does not meet contract requirements (Sub-Clause 8.3 or equivalent). If no notice is issued within this period, the Engineer or Employer is deemed to have no objection to the revised programme.

This does not imply formal approval or consent, but the programme can be used for the execution and administration of the works in the absence of objections. This avoids unnecessary delay due to inaction.

Option D is correct as it captures this deemed “no objection” position.

Option B is incorrect as “deemed consent” is stronger than FIDIC provisions state; it is more correct to say “no objection”.

Option A is incorrect since the Contractor does not have to remind the Engineer or Employer for consent within this period.

Option C is incorrect because the Contractor may proceed if no non-compliance is notified.

This situation is governed by Sub-Clause 4.24 [Fossils] of the FIDIC Yellow Book 1999. According to this clause, all fossils, coins, articles of value, antiquities, and structures of geological or archaeological interest discovered on the Site are considered the property of the Employer. The Contractor is required to take reasonable precautions to prevent removal or damage and must immediately notify the Engineer upon discovery.

In this scenario, the supervisor has acted correctly by stopping the Works, securing the Site, and informing the Engineer. The Engineer’s responsibility is then to take control of the situation in accordance with contractual and legal obligations. This includes ensuring the Site remains secure, instructing the Contractor to provide guards or protective measures, and notifying the Employer and relevant local authorities. Since these actions may cause delay and incur additional cost, the Engineer should formalize instructions through a Variation under Clause 13, allowing the Contractor to be compensated for such measures.

Option A is incorrect because it violates ownership rights and proper procedures. Option C is wrong because the Engineer is not prevented from acting pending formal notice—immediate action is required. Option D is incorrect because it disregards the importance of preserving archaeological findings and breaches Sub-Clause 4.24 obligations.

Thus, Option B fully aligns with FIDIC risk allocation, procedural compliance, and the Engineer’s duty to administer the Contract properly.

Under FIDIC Red Book 1999, Sub-Clause 13.8 [Adjustments for Changes in Cost] governs the mechanism for price adjustment based on cost indices. A critical provision applies when the Contractor fails to complete the Works within the Time for Completion.

In such circumstances, FIDIC protects the Employer against additional cost increases resulting from Contractor-caused delay. The clause explicitly states that the adjustment of prices after the contractual completion date shall be calculated using whichever index is more favourable to the Employer between:

the indices applicable at the time the work is actually carried out (current index), and

the indices applicable 49 days before the expiry of the Time for Completion.

This ensures that the Contractor does not benefit from inflation or cost escalation occurring after the contractual completion date if the delay is attributable to the Contractor. It reinforces the principle that the Contractor bears the financial consequences of delays under its responsibility.

Options A and B are incomplete because they ignore the comparison mechanism. Option D is incorrect because the rule is predefined and not subject to further agreement.

Thus, Option C correctly reflects the FIDIC contractual mechanism for price adjustment after delayed completion.