Hubbry Logo
New Engineering ContractNew Engineering ContractMain
Open search
New Engineering Contract
Community hub
New Engineering Contract
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
New Engineering Contract
New Engineering Contract
New Engineering Contract
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
NEC Contracts logo

The New Engineering Contract (NEC), or NEC Engineering and Construction Contract, is a formalised system created by the UK Institution of Civil Engineers that guides the drafting of documents on civil engineering, construction and maintenance projects for the purpose of obtaining tenders, awarding and administering contracts.[1][2] NEC has become the default suite of contracts for public-sector works, services and supplies in the United Kingdom and Hong Kong. NEC contracts have also been successfully used in Australia, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Peru, the Philippines, South Africa, UAE, and many more. They are also increasingly being used in the private sector.

There have been four editions, the first in 1993, the second in 1995, the third in 2005 and the most recent in 2017.[3] The NEC3 was launched in 2005 and it was amended in April 2013. The NEC Users' Group, with over 400 members worldwide, brings together organisations and individual users of the NEC contract suite to exchange knowledge and best practice.[4]

History

[edit]

Originally contracts in the civil engineering and construction industries were bespoke and drafted by Chancery pleaders using their knowledge of leases rather than building processes. In 1879, Royal Institute of British Architects for construction projects created RIBA forms which lead to the Joint Contracts Tribunal, JCT forms. For civil engineering the need for a formalized approach to contracts led the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) to produce a formalised set of conditions of contract. In 1986, the ICE commissioned the development of a new form of contract as it was felt that there was a need for a form that had clearer language, clearer allocation of responsibilities and reduced opportunities for contractual “gamesmanship”. In 1991, this resulted in a consultative form of the New Engineering Contract form of contract. The first edition was published in 1993.[5] Wider use of the NEC was recommended by the Latham Report in 1994.[citation needed]

NEC's history started in 1986 when Martin Barnes was commissioned to start drafting a contract to stimulate good project management. The first edition of NEC was launched in 1993. NEC2 arrived two years later, in 1995. NEC2 was used to build the High Speed 1 railway, between London and the Channel Tunnel.[citation needed]

NEC is a division of Thomas Telford Ltd, the commercial arm of the ICE.[6]

NEC3

[edit]

The NEC3 suite was launched in 2005 and it was fully revised in 2013 - NEC's 20th anniversary. This suite was used in projects such as Crossrail, London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic games,[7] Halley VI in Antarctica, and the Tin Shui Wai Hospital in Hong Kong.[citation needed] NEC3 was endorsed by the Construction Clients' Board (formerly Public Sector Construction Clients' Forum), Crown Commercial Services, the Facilities Management Board of the UK Cabinet Office, the South African Construction Industry Development Board, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the Association for Project Management (APM) and the British Institute of Facilities Management (BIFM).[8]

The Hong Kong government decided to use NEC3 contracts generally for all government projects tendered in 2015/16. After a series of successful NEC3 projects in the region, the Hong Kong government announced in November 2016 that the NEC contract suite would be used for all future public works projects as far as practicable.[9] Since 2017, Hong Kong has progressively moved to adopt NEC4.[10]

NEC4

[edit]

NEC4 was announced in March 2017 and has been available since June 2017. This new edition reflects procurement and project management developments and emerging best practice, with improvements in flexibility, clarity and the ease of administration. It also introduced two new contracts: the NEC4 Design, Build and Operate Contract (DBO) and the NEC4 Alliance Contract (ALC).[11] An NEC4 contract suite covering facilities management was released in 2021.[12]

Several changes to terminology were introduced in NEC4, for example:

  • The term "Employer" was replaced with "Client"
  • "Scope" was used in place of "Works Information"
  • The term "Risk Register" was replaced with "Early Warning Register".[13]

One former NEC3 clause which dealt with the "spirit" of the contract was divided into two clauses, to show that both aspects should be complied with:

  • Clause 10.1: the parties and the service manager act as stated in the contract
  • Clause 10.2: the parties and the service manager act in a spirit of mutual trust and cooperation.[14]

Characteristics

[edit]

The NEC is a family of standard contracts, each of which stimulate good management of the relationship between the two parties to the contract and, hence, of the work included in the contract, can be used in a wide variety of commercial situations, for a wide variety of types of work and in any location, and are clear and simple documents using language and a structure which are straightforward and easily understood. The contracts legally define the responsibilities and duties of Employers (the party which commissions the work) and Contractors (the party which carries out the work) in the works information. The contract consists of two key parts, divided between contract data provided by the Employer and that provided by the Contractor. The NEC3 complies fully with the Achieving Excellence in Construction (AEC) principles. The Efficiency and Reform Group of the UK Cabinet Office recommends the use of NEC contracts by public sector construction procurers on construction projects.[citation needed]

NEC documents use some of their own terminology in a specific manner, for example "compensation event" is a term used to encompass variations, losses and expenses, and extensions of time. The term implies that in some situations the contractor will be "compensated" with additional payment, e.g. for additional expenses incurred as a result of client actions, but financial compensation may not always arise and in some cases variations will result in a cost saving.[15]

Contract family

[edit]

The NEC contracts now form a suite of contracts, with NEC being the brand name for the "family" of contracts.[16] When it was first launched in 1993, it was simply the "New Engineering Contract". This specific contract has been renamed the "Engineering and Construction Contract" which is the main contract used for any construction based project. It now sits alongside a number of other contracts, making the NEC suite suitable for use in many stages of the lifecycle of a project and for any party within a project. The contracts available within the suite are:

Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC):

Suitable for any construction based contract between an Employer and a Contractor. It is intended to be suitable for any sector of the industry, including civil, building, nuclear, oil and gas, etc. Within the ECC contract there are six family level options, from which the Employer is to choose the most suitable and offer the best option/value for money on that project:

  • Option A: Priced contract with activity schedule
  • Option B: Priced contract with bill of quantities
  • Option C: Target contract with activity schedule
  • Option D: Target contract with bill of quantities
  • Option E: Cost-reimbursable contract
  • Option F: Management contract

These options offer a framework for tender and contract clauses that differ primarily in regard to the mechanisms by which the contractor is paid and how risk is allocated and motivated to control costs.

The core clauses (of the main option listed above) are used in conjunction with the secondary options and the additional conditions of contract.

The clauses of these options have been be adapted for simpler less risky work (short contracts), for use as subcontracts, and for professional services such as design as below.

The Engineering and Construction Subcontract Contract (ECS)

Very similar in detail and complexity of contractual requirements to the ECC contract above, but allows the contractor to sub-let the project to a subcontractor imposing most of the clauses that she/he has within her/his headline contract. There is very little difference between the ECC and the ECS, other than the names of the parties are changed (contractor and subcontractor) and some of the timescales for contractual responses are altered to take into account the timescales required in the ECC contract.

The Engineering and Construction Short Contract (ECSC)

This is an abbreviated version of the ECC contract and most suitable when the contract is considered "low risk" (not necessarily low value) on a project with little change expected. This contract is still between the employer and contractor but does not use all of the processes of the ECC making it simpler and easier to manage and administer.

The Engineering and Construction Short Subcontract (ECSS)

Allows the contractor to sub-let a simpler lower risk contract down the line to a subcontractor. It is back-to-back with the ECSC but is frequently used as subcontract when the main contract is under the ECS.

The Professional Services Contract (PSC)

This contract is for anyone providing a service, rather than undertaking any physical construction works. Designers are the most obvious party to fit into this category. Whilst they are producing a design for an employer or contractor, they would sign up and follow the clauses within the PSC. Most of the clauses within this contract are the same or similar to those in the main ECC contract, so that all contractors, designers and subcontractors have broadly the same obligations and processes to follow as each other. The PSC can be used in a wide variety of situations with relatively little change required.[17]

As with the ECC contract, there are several main options:

  • Option A: Priced contract with activity schedule
  • Option C: Target contract
  • Option E: Time based contract
  • Option G: Term contract.

Options B, D and F do not exist.[18]

The Professional Services Short Contract (PSSC)

This was added to the family in April 2013 and was co-developed with the Association for Project Management. It is for simpler less complex assignments than the PSC, such as the appointment of small team for managing an ECC contract on the Employer's behalf. E.g. the Project Manager and Supervisor. It is frequently used as a subcontract to the PSC for design work.

Framework Contract (FC)

Parties enter into a "framework" of which work packages will then be let during the life of that framework. Any individual projects will then be awarded using one of the other contracts within the suite, meaning that the parties follow the headline clauses within the framework contract (which is a fairly slim contract) and then the individual clauses within the chosen contract for that package. Different work packages can be let using different contracts during the life of the framework.

Term Service Contract (TSC)

For parties on a project that is operational or maintenance based, e.g. maintaining highway signage, where the contract is to ensure that a certain standard is maintained. This contract is not generally used for constructing new works, but can include some amount of betterment. There is also a "Term Service Short Contract" where the project is a relatively low risk project and/or the work is primarily re-active. It is an abbreviated version of the main TSC.

Supply Contract/Short Supply Contract (SC/SSC)

These contracts were launched in 2010. This is for a supplier of supplies or goods to a project, and puts extra contractual requirements on them during their procurement/manufacture period. The Supply Contract is for big bespoke items i.e. designed and manufactured specifically for that contract, with the Short Supply Contract potentially being for more run of the mill / commoditised items on a project. Neither of these contracts cover working on a site as they are not written as 'supply and install' contracts.

Dispute Resolution Services Contract (DRSC) - previously Adjudicator's Contract

If there is a dispute between the parties on a project, the Adjudicator will follow the clauses within this contract in order to come to a decision.

Design Build and Operate (DBO)

The NEC4 Design, Build and Operate Contract (DBO) allows the procurement of a more integrated whole-life delivery solution. It combines responsibility for design, construction, operation and/or maintenance, procured from a single supplier.

It can include a range of different services to be provided before, during and after engineering and construction works are completed.

Alliance Contract (ALC)

The NEC4 Alliance Contract (ALC), published initially in a consultative format, was created to support clients who wish to take a step forward by fully integrating the delivery team for large complex projects.

The ALC should be used to engage in a single collaborative contract with a number of participants in order to deliver a project or programme of work. The basis of the contract will be that all parties work together in achieving client objectives, and share in the risks and benefits of doing so.

Facilities Management contract suite

The NEC4 FMC suite includes the Facilities Management contract (FMC), subcontract (FMS), short contract (FMSC) and short subcontract (FMSS).[12]

Guidance Notes and Flowcharts

Each of the different contracts listed above comes with its own set of guidance notes and flowcharts which should aid understanding of the intent of the drafted clauses. The guidance notes expand on each clause to give extra substance and intent of the original drafters as to how a clause should be understood and interpreted. The flowcharts then map out each of the main processes within each contract and demonstrate how it should operate and what to do next if a party has or has not carried out the next contractual action.

Comparison

[edit]

The following demonstrates the differing approaches to drafting in the NEC and ICE forms of contract using the illustration of circumstances when the contractor is entitled to additional time and cost for physical conditions:

NEC Engineering and Construction Contract Second Edition Clause 60.1 (12)

The Contractor encounters physical conditions which are within the site, are not weather conditions and which an experienced contractor would have judged at the contract date to have such a small chance of occurring that it would have been unreasonable for her/him to have allowed for them.

ICE Conditions of Contract Sixth Edition Clause 12(1)

If during the execution of the Works the Contractor shall encounter physical conditions (other than weather conditions or conditions due to weather conditions) or artificial obstructions which conditions or obstructions could not in her/his opinion reasonably have been foreseen by an experienced contractor the Contractor shall as early as practicable give written notice thereof to the Engineer.

Z clauses

[edit]

Employers often use additional conditions of contract ("Z clauses") to amend or delete contract provisions relating to certain obligations, and the Efficiency and Reform Group of the Cabinet Office in the UK (formerly the OGC) has published generic public sector Z clauses for use with NEC contracts.[19] A standard Z clause relating to fair payment for sub-contractors (often labelled "Z5") was recommended for public sector use in 2011,[20] and additional public sector Z clauses were later published to reflect the contract termination provisions and other requirements of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015.[21]

Excessive use of Z clauses has been criticised as "onerous" and "poorly drafted"; NEC guidance states that "additional conditions should be used only when absolutely necessary to accommodate special needs".[22]

Guidance notes and further information

[edit]

Footnotes

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

New Engineering Contract

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The New Engineering Contract (NEC) is a family of contract documents developed for procuring and managing , and projects, emphasizing , proactive , and clear communication to deliver successful outcomes on time and within budget. Originating from the United Kingdom's (ICE), the NEC was first published in 1993 following seven years of research aimed at addressing the adversarial nature of traditional contracts and promoting better practices. The initial edition focused on engineering and works, with a second edition released in 1995 that introduced the core Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC). Subsequent revisions expanded its scope: NEC3 in 2005 supported over £100 billion in global projects, while NEC4, launched in 2017, enhanced flexibility, clarity, and digital tools for modern needs. As of November 2025, NEC4 remains the current suite, incorporating updates such as Secondary Option X29 ( and ) in 2022, and the acquisition of complementary frameworks like FAC-1 (Framework Alliance Contract) and TAC-1 (Term Alliance Contract) in June 2025 to broaden alliance-based options. At its core, the NEC suite operates on six fundamental principles: clarity in language to minimize , mutual trust and among parties, allocation of based on control, definition of roles and responsibilities, proactive management through early warnings and compensation events, and an impartial approach to disputes via . These principles are embedded across various contract types, including the ECC for main works, the Professional Service Contract (PSC) for consultancy, the Supply Contract for goods, and alliance models like the Alliance Contract (ALC), enabling tailored application to diverse project scales from small to major . The NEC has gained international adoption, endorsed by governments such as those in the UK, (fully in ), and (via Spanish translations in ), due to its proven benefits in significantly reducing disputes compared to traditional forms and achieving cost savings through efficient processes. High-profile applications include the London 2012 Olympics venues and numerous projects worldwide, underscoring its role in fostering collaborative environments that prioritize project certainty and fair payment mechanisms.

History and Evolution

Origins and Early Development

The development of the New Engineering Contract (NEC) was initiated in 1986 by the (ICE), which commissioned leading consultant Martin Barnes to draft a radical new form of aimed at stimulating effective and addressing the adversarial nature of traditional contracts such as JCT and FIDIC. These established forms were criticized for fostering disputes through rigid, confrontational structures that prioritized individual party interests over collaborative outcomes, often leading to costly delays, litigation, and project failures. Barnes' team sought to create a more equitable framework using , language for clarity, and a modular design to promote flexibility and reduce ambiguity. The first edition, NEC1, was published in 1993, marking a deliberate shift toward collaboration to minimize disputes while focusing primarily on and projects, though with aspirations for broader applicability across the . Key features included clear risk allocation, emphasis on proactive management, and a non-adversarial philosophy, but it lacked the formalized main options (A through F) for and risk-sharing mechanisms that would be introduced in subsequent editions. Early was limited due to unfamiliarity with its innovative approach and resistance from legal professionals accustomed to traditional contracts, resulting in slower uptake despite initial use by organizations like the British Airports Authority and in . This foundational work received significant validation from influential industry reports. The Latham Report of 1994, titled Constructing the Team, praised NEC1 as "extremely promising" for aligning with recommendations on reform and partnering to enhance efficiency and reduce confrontation. Similarly, the Egan Report of 1998, Rethinking , underscored the need for partnering and integrated processes to improve efficiency, further highlighting NEC's collaborative ethos as a model for industry transformation. In response to early challenges, the second edition, NEC2, was released in 1995, incorporating expanded guidance notes, additional contract forms like the Professional Services Contract, and refinements to support wider adoption.

NEC3 Edition

The NEC3 edition of the New Engineering Contract was released in June 2005 by the () following extensive consultation with industry stakeholders to refine and expand upon the collaborative framework established in prior versions. This edition marked a significant evolution, addressing shortcomings in NEC2 such as ambiguous definitions by providing greater clarity and structure in contractual language. Building briefly on the origins of NEC1 and NEC2, NEC3 emphasized proactive management to foster from through completion. A key enhancement in NEC3 was the introduction of the early warning register, which required parties to promptly notify each other of potential , enabling joint mitigation strategies to avoid disputes and delays. Complementing this, compensation events were formalized as mechanisms for equitable allocation, allowing adjustments to time and when unforeseen circumstances arose, thus promoting transparency over adversarial claims. Additionally, secondary options W1 and W2 were added to handle processes: W1 for contracts not under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, and W2 for those governed by it, ensuring streamlined . The contract family under NEC3 expanded to include core documents such as the Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC) for works procurement, the Professional Services Contract (PSC) for consultancy services, and the Term Service Contract (TSC) for ongoing maintenance. Pricing mechanisms were diversified through main options A to F: for instance, Option A employed activity schedule pricing, where the contractor's payment was based on completed activities listed in a schedule, offering simplicity for lump-sum arrangements. These options allowed flexibility to suit project scale and risk profile, from priced contracts (A and B) to target cost models (C and D) and cost-reimbursable approaches (E and F). In the target cost (Options C and D) and cost-reimbursable (Options E and F) main options, NEC3 introduced the concept of Disallowed Cost under clause 11.2(25), which defined certain costs as non-recoverable, such as those not justified by the contractor's accounts and records, incurred due to the contractor not following procurement procedures or failing to give early warnings, costs of correcting defects after the completion date, costs of plant or materials not used to provide the works, and costs of preparing for adjudication. This provision did not apply to the priced options A and B, which lack cost reimbursement elements, thereby enhancing risk allocation and encouraging transparency and proper management in collaborative project delivery. Adoption of NEC3 accelerated rapidly, becoming the mandated standard for government projects from 2005 onward, particularly following procurement guidelines for the 2012 London Olympics that favored its collaborative ethos. It was extensively used in high-profile initiatives like the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic venues, where over 100 NEC3 contracts were employed and its tools contributed to efficient delivery under tight timelines. By the mid-2010s, NEC3 had become a mainstream choice for infrastructure worldwide, establishing benchmarks for modern practices.

NEC4 Edition

The NEC4 edition of the New Engineering Contract suite was launched in June 2017 by the (ICE), building on the collaborative foundations of NEC3 while incorporating extensive industry feedback to enhance clarity and applicability. This edition introduced simplified language throughout the contracts, making them more accessible and reducing ambiguity in interpretation, alongside the addition of two new contract forms: the and Operate Contract (DBO) for integrated lifecycle management and the Contract (ALC) for multiparty collaborative delivery. These changes evolved from NEC3's mechanisms by emphasizing proactive collaboration, including Clause 10.2, which mandates that parties, the , and act in a spirit of mutual trust and cooperation to facilitate better partner selection and ongoing relationships. Subsequent refinements have kept NEC4 as the active and leading suite, with no full NEC5 edition released as of 2025. Key updates include the October 2020 amendments addressing -specific compliance issues, such as revisions to Option Y(UK)2 to align with post-Brexit regulatory changes in and processes, and the January 2023 amendments incorporating further and digital elements. Secondary Option X29, requiring parties to comply with requirements including carbon reduction targets and reporting, was added in July 2022 to embed within project delivery. Enhanced dispute avoidance provisions, such as the new Option W3 process involving senior representative discussions and panels, further support collaborative resolution while integrating social value considerations through requirements for equitable practices and benefits. Additionally, NEC4 integrates Building Information Modelling (BIM) standards via secondary Option X10, which governs the creation, modification, and sharing of information models to promote digital efficiency. The November 2025 launch of NEC Digital, an online platform for contract drafting and administration, further advances by streamlining document management and reducing administrative errors. In June 2025, NEC acquired the Framework Alliance Contract (FAC-1) and Term Alliance Contract (TAC-1) to broaden alliance-based procurement options within the suite. By 2025, NEC4 has become extensively adopted internationally, with multilingual guidance available in languages such as Spanish, , and Chinese to support global use, and ongoing refinements addressing ESG factors like social inclusion and governance through updated partnering tools. This edition underpins thousands of active contracts worldwide, demonstrating its impact in fostering efficient, low-dispute project outcomes across sectors.

Core Principles and Characteristics

Collaborative Philosophy

The collaborative philosophy of the New Engineering Contract (NEC) represents a fundamental shift in construction contracting from traditional adversarial approaches to a partnering model emphasizing mutual trust, cooperation, and shared objectives. This ethos emerged in response to critiques of the UK's construction industry's blame culture, as highlighted in the Latham Report of 1994, which advocated for less confrontational procurement methods and wider adoption of innovative contracts like the early to promote teamwork and efficiency. Building on this, the Egan Report of 1998, titled Rethinking Construction, further reinforced the need for integrated project teams and long-term relationships to drive productivity and reduce fragmentation, influencing 's evolution toward proactive collaboration across all project phases. At the heart of this philosophy is core clause 10.2, which imposes a binding on all parties—including the client, contractor, , and —to act in a spirit of mutual trust and cooperation, prioritizing transparency and joint problem-solving over confrontational tactics. This clause applies universally across the entire family of contracts, from engineering and construction to and alliances, ensuring consistent promotion of openness in communications and decision-making. Key concepts include a strong emphasis on proactive management, where clearly defined roles—such as the , who administers the contract and facilitates decisions, and the , who monitors compliance and quality—work interdependently to build and prevent issues from escalating. The philosophy yields tangible benefits by fostering an environment of shared success, with no provisions for punitive damages and a focus instead on actual costs and value optimization through collaborative . Studies by the indicate that NEC adoption significantly reduces disputes in infrastructure projects, often resolving potential conflicts informally before they reach litigation or . This cultural shift supports mechanisms like early warnings to maintain alignment, ultimately enhancing project outcomes through reduced adversarial costs and improved stakeholder relationships.

Risk Management Mechanisms

The New Engineering Contract (NEC) incorporates structured mechanisms to identify, notify, and allocate risks proactively, aiming to foster collaboration and minimize disputes in and projects. Central to this approach is the early warning process outlined in Clause 15, which mandates that the , contractor, and other parties notify each other "as soon as" they become aware of any matter that could affect time, cost, or quality. These notifications trigger updates to the and lead to early warning meetings where parties discuss potential impacts and jointly develop strategies, ensuring risks are addressed before they escalate. This process is supported by a shared that documents identified risks, their potential effects, and agreed actions, promoting transparency and collective responsibility. Compensation events, detailed in Clauses 60 to 65, provide a formalized framework for handling defined risks that entitle the contractor to adjustments in time or cost. These events include scope changes instructed by the , exceptional conditions, unforeseen physical conditions, and delays caused by the employer or others, with 21 specific instances listed in clause 60.1. Upon notification of a compensation event, the contractor submits quotations forecasting the impact on the programme and prices. In the NEC4 ECC, if the effects of a compensation event are too uncertain to be forecast reasonably, Clause 61.6 provides that the Project Manager states assumptions about the effects of the compensation event and instructs the Contractor to submit quotations based on those assumptions. The assesses and implements accepted quotations, ensuring equitable allocation without adversarial negotiation. This mechanism differs from traditional contracts by avoiding concurrent delay clauses, instead sharing risks equitably based on defined triggers to prevent disputes over overlapping causes. Programme requirements under Clause 31 further bolster by requiring the contractor to submit detailed programmes for acceptance at regular intervals, typically every four weeks, which must illustrate the critical path, planned completion dates, and access dates. These accepted programmes establish float ownership, with total float belonging to the project rather than individual parties, allowing flexibility in managing delays while protecting overall project timelines. By integrating risk assessments into the programme, including key dates and sectional completions, ensures that potential disruptions are visualized and monitored continuously. In target cost options such as Options C and D, pain/gain share mechanisms allocate financial risks equitably between the client and contractor based on final costs relative to the target, incentivizing efficient to share savings or overruns proportionally. This approach, combined with the absence of punitive clauses for delays, encourages parties to focus on prevention rather than blame, aligning with NEC's overarching collaborative ethos.

The NEC Contract Suite

Engineering and Construction Contracts

The Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC) is the core works contract in the New Engineering Contract (NEC) suite, primarily used to manage the , , , and of and building projects. It emphasizes collaborative working and proactive management to deliver projects efficiently while minimizing disputes. The ECC is versatile, accommodating various levels of contractor responsibility and risk allocation, making it suitable for complex developments such as roads, bridges, and commercial buildings. A key sub-type of the ECC is the Engineering and Construction Short Contract (ECSC), which provides a streamlined alternative for low-risk, straightforward projects where sophisticated management procedures are unnecessary. The ECSC employs a simple price list for payments and reduced administrative requirements, ideal for smaller-scale works with minimal uncertainty. For quicker or less complex builds, the ECC can incorporate secondary options like X6 (bonus for early completion), which incentivizes timely delivery through predefined bonuses, though it is not a standalone variant. The ECC's main options (A through F) allow flexible pricing mechanisms, such as priced s with activity schedules (Option A) or target cost arrangements (Option C), selected based on project and control needs. Central to the ECC are features that define project execution and . The scope of works is outlined in the Works Information, a detailed document specifying requirements, standards, and deliverables to ensure clarity and alignment between parties. The contract mandates the submission and acceptance of a programme by the , which serves as the baseline for monitoring progress, assessing delays, and managing compensation events. Additionally, it includes structured defects correction periods, typically 52 weeks post-completion, during which the contractor must rectify identified issues at no extra cost, promoting accountability and long-term project integrity. The ECC dominates in applications, particularly for in the UK. It has been extensively used in highways projects by Highways England for maintenance and upgrades, as well as in major rail initiatives like (now the ), which procured £6.5 billion of works under NEC3 ECC terms, and (HS2), with £11.8 billion in Phase One contracts awarded via NEC forms. These examples highlight the ECC's role in delivering large-scale, time-sensitive projects through its emphasis on early warnings and mutual trust.

Professional Service and Term Contracts

The Professional Service Contract (PSC) within the NEC4 suite is designed for appointing consultants to provide , such as those from architects, engineers, project managers, service managers, supervisors, and designers, in projects. It emphasizes collaborative working through core clauses that promote mutual trust, early warnings for potential issues, and a structured approach to managing changes via compensation events. The contract includes provisions for to resolve disputes efficiently, ensuring fast and fair outcomes. Services are clearly defined in the Scope document, which outlines the consultant's responsibilities, and payment is handled through main options including Option A (priced contract with activity schedule, placing most on the provider), Option C (target contract with shared ), and Option E (cost-reimbursable contract, with higher on the client). Fee structures are integrated into these options, allowing flexibility for time-based or payments. In practice, the PSC can align with the Royal Institute of British Architects () Plan of Work stages, where task orders may correspond to specific RIBA phases for design and advisory services. The Term Service Contract (TSC) is tailored for engaging suppliers over a defined period to deliver ongoing services, such as maintenance, operations, and facilities management for operational assets. It supports one-off tasks alongside continuous service provision, with pricing mechanisms including Option A (via activity schedule, with high risk to the provider), Option C (target cost for shared risk), and Option E (cost-reimbursable). Key elements include the Scope, which details required services and performance standards; regular task orders that instruct specific activities with quoted costs, start and completion dates, and associated delay damages; and performance tables to monitor key performance indicators (KPIs) for accountability. The contract also addresses defect correction in services, requiring the service provider to rectify non-conformances promptly without additional cost to the client. Both the PSC and TSC are widely applied in the for sustained support roles, such as NHS estates management, where they facilitate long-term advisory and maintenance arrangements. For instance, the has utilized the TSC for facilities management, demonstrating its effectiveness in operational environments. These contracts complement the (ECC) by enabling integrated project delivery through aligned service provisions.

Supply and Alliance Contracts

The NEC Supply Contract (SC) is designed for the procurement of high-value goods and associated services on a local or international basis, encompassing elements such as design and training for complex items like turbines, generators, and transformers. It facilitates the purchase of major plant equipment, including , cranes, gantries, and tunnel boring machines, emphasizing clear delivery obligations through early warnings and a continually updated delivery programme to mitigate delays. Defects are addressed via collaborative mechanisms that promote mutual trust, effective risk allocation, and prompt compensation events to ensure performance standards are maintained without adversarial disputes. In contrast, the Supply Short Contract (SSC) serves as a streamlined option for lower-risk procurements, suitable for single or batch orders of simpler goods such as building materials, , manufactured parts, and basic plant items, where sophisticated management is unnecessary. Like the SC, the SSC incorporates provisions for early notifications of issues impacting delivery dates and an updated delivery programme, alongside defect management through cooperative approaches and fair compensation processes. Both contracts utilize price lists within their schedules to define costs transparently, supporting applications in off-site fabrication and modular where timely integration is critical. The Alliance Contract (ALC), introduced in the NEC4 edition, establishes a multiparty framework that unites clients and partners as equal members to deliver complex, large-scale projects or programmes through shared decision-making and . It promotes deep by aligning all participants to the client's strategic objectives, incorporating early contractor involvement (ECI) to leverage supplier expertise from the outset in and identification. Key performance indicators (KPIs) drive performance, with gain and pain share mechanisms distributing and rewards based on collective achievement of targets, including caps on liabilities to encourage without undue exposure. This structure fosters shared across disciplines, making it particularly applicable to mega-projects in sectors like energy infrastructure, where multidisciplinary coordination and long-term service provision are essential. These contracts build on the core principles of mutual trust and proactive management to enhance efficiency and alliance-based delivery.

Contract Components

Main Options

The main options in New Engineering Contracts () define the primary pricing mechanisms and risk allocation frameworks for the Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC), allowing parties to select from six variants (A through F) based on the project's scope certainty and desired collaboration level. These options establish how payments are structured, whether costs are fixed, target-based, or reimbursable, and who bears financial risks such as overruns or savings. Option A: Priced contract with activity operates on a lump-sum basis, where the contractor agrees to a fixed price derived from an activity outlining key work elements. The contractor assumes the majority of risk, as payments are released upon completion of scheduled activities, making it suitable for projects with well-defined scopes and high certainty. This option promotes efficiency through the contractor's incentive to manage within the agreed price. Option B: Priced contract with resembles traditional remeasurable contracts, using a to set rates for measured work items. The total price is fixed at tender, but actual payments adjust based on quantities executed, with the contractor bearing most cost risks except for quantity variations certified by the . It is ideal for projects where the scope is certain but quantities may vary, such as works. Option C: Target contract with activity schedule introduces a target cost mechanism, where the contractor is reimbursed for defined s plus a , with any difference between the final total and the target shared as pain (overruns) or gain (savings). Risk is collaboratively shared, typically on a 50/50 basis unless adjusted, encouraging joint control through early contractor involvement. This option suits moderately complex projects with some in costs but defined activities. Option D: Target contract with bill of quantities functions similarly to Option C but uses a for remeasurement, allowing the target cost to be adjusted for quantity changes. The shared applies to the final out-turn cost after remeasurement, balancing collaborative risk sharing with accountability for volume variations. It is appropriate for projects with uncertain quantities but where a target cost framework fosters partnership. Option E: Cost reimbursable contract reimburses the contractor for actual defined costs plus a , with the client assuming most due to the open-ended structure. This option is used for high-uncertainty scenarios, such as or early-stage works, where scope is incomplete and flexibility is paramount. The contractor's risk is limited primarily to performance. Option F: Management contract positions the contractor as a manager overseeing subcontractors, with payments covering the actual costs of those subcontractors plus a . The client bears the bulk of , while the contractor focuses on coordination and ; it is selected for projects requiring strong expertise amid low scope certainty, such as phased developments. In the NEC3 edition of the Engineering and Construction Contract, the target cost options (C and D) and cost-reimbursable options (E and F) include provisions for Disallowed Costs, defined in clause 11.2(25). These are costs deducted from Defined Costs prior to reimbursement or inclusion in the Price for Works Done to Date, ensuring non-qualifying expenses are not recovered. Examples of Disallowed Costs include costs not justified by the contractor's accounts and records, costs incurred due to failure to give an early warning or follow required procedures, costs that should not have been paid to a subcontractor, costs of correcting defects after the completion date, costs of plant or materials not used to Provide the Works, and costs of preparing for adjudication proceedings. These provisions do not apply to the priced options A and B, which lack cost reimbursement mechanisms and thus have no disallowed cost clauses. Selection of main options is guided by project certainty: Options A and B for high certainty with fixed pricing; Options C and D for moderate certainty emphasizing shared incentives; and Options E and F for low certainty prioritizing flexibility. In target cost options (C and D), the pain/gain share is calculated as (final total of the Prices - target cost) multiplied by the agreed share percentage, with adjustments assessed through compensation events that notify and evaluate changes impacting the target. These main options can be combined with secondary options to further customize terms like adjustments or .

Secondary Options

Secondary Options in the New Engineering Contract (NEC4) suite provide supplementary clauses that parties can select at contract formation to address specific project needs, such as risk adjustments, legal compliance, and dispute mechanisms, while integrating seamlessly with the core clauses and main options. These options are categorized into , and series, allowing customization without altering the contract's fundamental collaborative structure. The X series focuses on changes and adjustments to manage evolving project conditions. Secondary Option X1 enables price adjustments for by applying agreed indices to relevant costs, helping to mitigate financial impacts from economic fluctuations. X2 addresses changes in or regulations, entitling the contractor to compensation for additional costs or time extensions resulting from such alterations. X7 specifies delay , establishing a cap on for late completion as defined in the Contract Data, which promotes fair risk allocation while incentivizing timely delivery. X12 supports multiparty by outlining procedures for joint decision-making and shared risks among multiple organizations involved in a project. X15 delineates the contractor's responsibilities, including standards of care and liability for design defects, applicable when the contractor undertakes design work. Introduced in NEC4, X29 imposes obligations related to , requiring parties to implement measures for and , such as reporting on carbon emissions and aligning with environmental . Y series options tailor the contract to specific jurisdictional requirements. Y(UK) clauses adapt the NEC4 for use under law, incorporating provisions like third-party rights under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 and ensuring compliance with local regulations. Similarly, Y(Aus) modifies the contract for Australian legal frameworks, addressing local procurement laws and dispute processes. W series options govern dispute resolution procedures. W1 applies to contracts not subject to the UK's Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, providing for with a decision required within four weeks of referral, followed by potential escalation to litigation or . W2, used for contracts under the Act, mandates statutory with a 28-day timeline for the adjudicator's decision, emphasizing rapid resolution to maintain project momentum while allowing unresolved disputes to proceed to .

Z Clauses and Customization

Z clauses serve as bespoke additional conditions in New Engineering Contracts (NEC), enabling parties to amend core or secondary clauses to address specific project requirements or jurisdictional mandates, such as modifying payment terms or incorporating statutory obligations. These clauses are inserted via the contract data part one and hold equivalent status to standard NEC provisions, allowing tailored adaptations without requiring a complete rewrite of the form. NEC guidance emphasizes that Z clauses should be used sparingly to maintain the contract's collaborative ethos and avoid diluting the standard framework's intent. Best practices include drafting by individuals experienced in NEC terminology, prioritizing additions over amendments to existing clauses, and ensuring alignment with the project's and strategy for clarity and simplicity. However, poorly drafted Z clauses pose significant risks, as they can reintroduce adversarial elements by overriding key mechanisms like early warning notifications, potentially leading to disputes and ambiguity in risk allocation. Research by indicates that only 8% of Z clauses are valid and necessary, with the remaining 92% either redundant or attempting to shift the contract's risk profile in ways that undermine NEC principles. Common examples include Z clauses for local regulations, such as those mandating compliance with laws on federally funded projects, or deletions of standard options like target cost mechanisms to suit unique financial structures. Unlike formally numbered secondary options, Z clauses lack predefined numbering beyond sequential labels (e.g., Z1, Z2) and are routinely reviewed in official guidance notes for international adaptations, where they facilitate alignment with diverse legal environments.

Comparisons with Other Standards

Versus Traditional Contracts

Traditional contracts in the UK industry prior to the introduction of the were characterized by fixed obligations and a blame-oriented approach, often fostering an adversarial "us versus them" culture that led to high levels of mistrust and litigation. Surveys from the early indicated that 52% of industry respondents viewed standard contracts as encouraging conflict and litigation, while 38% highlighted significant mistrust in contractual arrangements. This environment contributed to substantial economic burdens, with over £1 billion annually attributed to defects and failures alone, and specific projects experiencing up to 28% excess costs over tender prices due to unresolved claims. In contrast, the NEC introduces a flexible, proactive framework that emphasizes mutual trust and cooperation as core principles, requiring parties to act in a spirit of from the outset. Unlike the reactive, legalese-heavy language of traditional contracts, NEC employs to promote clarity and simplicity, moving away from the dense legal jargon that often exacerbated ambiguities and disputes. Risk management shifts from strictly allocated responsibilities to shared oversight through mechanisms like the early warning process, where parties must notify each other immediately of potential issues affecting time, cost, or quality, enabling joint mitigation strategies. Traditional contracts typically relied rigidly on bills of quantities for pricing and variation assessments, limiting adaptability, whereas NEC prioritizes the accepted programme as a dynamic tool for forecasting and adjusting to changes, allowing for more responsive . These differences yield notable advantages for users, including faster project delivery and lower administrative costs through efficient handling of changes and compensation events. on infrastructure projects shows a lower overall rate of formal disputes under NEC compared to traditional forms, attributed to its proactive processes that address issues before they escalate. The reports major benefits in time and cost savings, alongside improved quality and on national and international projects. However, adopting NEC demands a significant cultural shift from adversarial norms to collaborative practices, which can be challenging for teams accustomed to traditional methods. Additionally, it requires upfront investment in training to master its specific terminology, procedures, and data-intensive requirements, potentially increasing initial administrative burdens if not properly resourced.

Versus JCT and FIDIC

The New Engineering Contract (NEC) emphasizes collaboration through mechanisms like the early warning process, which requires both the project manager and contractor to proactively notify each other of potential risks affecting time, cost, or quality, fostering mutual problem-solving from the outset. In contrast, the Joint Contracts Tribunal (JCT) contracts rely on more reactive notifications for changes or risks, with fixed risk allocation and no equivalent proactive early-warning procedure, making JCT suitable for standard building projects such as residential or commercial developments where roles are clearly delineated. NEC is particularly well-suited for complex infrastructure and engineering projects due to its flexibility in adapting to evolving scopes, while JCT aligns better with traditional building works in the UK private sector, including housing, where it serves as the de facto standard for simpler, low-risk endeavors. JCT offers a broader range of variants tailored for small-scale works, such as the Minor Works Building Contract for basic extensions or repairs, providing options not as extensively mirrored in the NEC suite. Compared to the International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) contracts, NEC promotes partnering and mutual trust and cooperation as core principles, encouraging joint and preventive measures like early warnings to avoid escalation. FIDIC, however, adopts an engineer-led approach where the engineer makes decisions on claims and variations, often transferring more risk to the contractor in a more prescriptive framework, which suits employer-driven projects in developing markets and civil law jurisdictions like those in the or GCC countries. This structure in FIDIC facilitates clearer accountability in high-risk environments but can lead to adversarial outcomes if not managed carefully, whereas NEC's dynamic risk allocation supports collaborative environments better. Research evaluating contract effectiveness indicates that NEC's proactive mechanisms contribute to lower rates of formal disputes overall compared to FIDIC, which focuses more on claims resolution after issues arise. NEC's suitability is prominent in the , where it has become the contract of choice for nearly all national and procurements, recommended by the for its collaborative ethos. FIDIC finds greater application in international civil law contexts, where its detailed provisions align with codified legal systems emphasizing and employer protections. JCT remains prevalent for private housing and building projects, offering forms like the Intermediate Building Contract for mid-sized developments with moderate complexity. Specific to modern editions, NEC4 integrates seamlessly with (BIM) through Secondary Option X10, which governs the creation and use of information models, enabling digital collaboration without extensive amendments. The FIDIC 2017 Rainbow Suite and subsequent 2022 updates introduced enhanced clauses, such as requirements for and climate considerations, yet these remain less flexible than NEC's adaptable structure, which allows easier incorporation of evolving goals through its core clauses and options.

Guidance and Implementation

Official Guidance Notes

The (ICE) publishes a suite of official guidance notes and related resources to support the interpretation and effective use of the New Engineering Contract (NEC) suite. These documents provide detailed explanations of contract clauses, practical examples of their application, and flowcharts illustrating key processes such as compensation events and programme management. For instance, the guidance notes for the Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC) address core provisions like risk registers, early warnings, and dispute avoidance, helping users navigate the collaborative ethos of NEC contracts. Contract-specific guidance notes, such as those for the ECC, are comprehensive, often exceeding 100 pages and structured to cover strategies, clause-by-clause analysis, and best practices. Additional types include resources on managing an , which outline best practices for and allocation; guides to preparing and running programmes, emphasizing timely updates and acceptance procedures; and dispute resolution guides, which detail timelines and early mechanisms like the NEC4 Conflict Avoidance Process. These materials are designed to promote proactive and minimize disputes. NEC4 guidance notes and practice notes have been revised in line with contract amendments issued in October 2020 and January 2023, incorporating updates for digital tools—such as Building Information Modelling (BIM) integration—and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors, including secondary option X29 on requirements. All resources are available for free online access through the official NEC website, ensuring broad accessibility for users worldwide. While non-binding, these guidance notes serve as authoritative references, frequently cited in to interpret ambiguous provisions, such as the assessment of compensation events under clause 63 of the ECC. Numerous such guidance titles exist across the family, with adaptations and translations tailored for international markets, including dedicated editions that align with local practices and resources supporting adoption in . This supportive framework aids global implementation by clarifying principles in diverse legal contexts.

Adoption and Global Use

In the , NEC contracts have been the preferred choice for since their endorsement by the Office of Government Commerce in 2005, becoming standard for nearly all national and projects in , and . This widespread adoption is evident in major initiatives such as the (HS2) rail project, where the UK government awarded over £11.8 billion in NEC-based contracts for phase one in 2015, facilitating collaborative delivery across complex rail . Globally, NEC contracts are utilized in numerous countries worldwide, including over 20 such as , , the , , , the Philippines, Singapore, , and the UAE, supporting diverse developments beyond the . In , the Development Bureau has mandated NEC forms for since 2009, resulting in over 680 contracts valued at more than HK$450 billion as of 2024; in November 2024, the second Edition of the NEC suite was launched to further align with local practices. In , NEC has been employed for three decades in projects, including and sanitation initiatives like borehole drilling and wastewater treatment at key facilities such as . Effective implementation of NEC contracts requires specialized to promote compliance and collaborative practices. The (ICE) accredits courses such as the NEC4 Engineering and (ECC) Project Manager Accreditation, which equips professionals with skills for managing projects under NEC terms, including risk allocation and early warning mechanisms; this certification is often essential for roles in public and major private sector applications. While NEC contracts demand higher initial setup due to their emphasis on proactive management, they yield long-term benefits including reduced disputes and cost efficiencies. A Kingston University study highlighted NEC's role in minimizing infrastructure disputes through structured collaboration, contrasting with traditional contracts' adversarial nature. The Crossrail project in the UK, valued at £14.5 billion and delivered using NEC3 forms, exemplified these advantages by integrating 40 major works contracts with minimal litigation, enabling on-time completion despite complexities involving 14,000 peak workers. In Hong Kong, NEC adoption has led to tangible cost savings via implemented measures in public works, enhancing overall project value. As of 2025, NEC contracts are seeing increased application in sectors, including offshore wind projects that leverage models for shared risk in sustainable . Additionally, digital platforms are advancing NEC programme management, with tools like NEC Digital enabling online contract drafting and integrated software for real-time collaboration and compliance tracking.

References

  1. https://www.neccontract.com/
  2. https://www.ice.org.uk/what-is-civil-engineering/infrastructure-projects/new-engineering-contract-nec
  3. https://www.ice.org.uk/about-us/our-services/nec-contracts
  4. https://www.neccontract.com/why-choose-nec/history
  5. https://ramskillmartin.co.uk/technical/back-to-basics-23-6-reasons-that-costs-will-be-disallowed-under-nec-option-c-d-e-and-f
  6. https://www.fenwickelliott.com/research-insight/newsletters/insight/62
  7. https://www.neccontract.com/resources/difference-between-nec3-and-nec4
  8. https://www.neccontract.com/products/contracts/nec4/engineering-and-construction-contract
  9. https://www.neccontract.com/resources/amendments
  10. https://www.neccontract.com/news/nec-publishes-new-secondary-option-x29-to-help-nec-users-progress-to-net-zero
  11. https://www.neccontract.com/news/how-nec4-helps-users-honour-the-conflict-avoidance-pledge
  12. https://www.neccontract.com/news/new-practice-note-on-nec4-and-bim
  13. https://www.neccontract.com/news/nec-contracts-launches-nec-digital
  14. https://www.ice.org.uk/news-views-insights/latest-news/thomas-telford-acquires-contracts-to-sit-along-nec
  15. https://www.neccontract.com/news/using-nec-outside-of-the-uk-an-update
  16. https://constructingexcellence.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Constructing-the-team-The-Latham-Report.pdf
  17. https://constructingexcellence.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/rethinking_construction_report.pdf
  18. https://www.neccontract.com/NEC/media/NEC/News-and-Media/Dickson_Robert_Dissertation.pdf
  19. https://www.neccontract.com/news/exploring-the-essence-and-extent-of-mutual-trust-and-co-operation
  20. https://www.neccontract.com/news/the-necessary-interaction-between-the-supervisor-and-the-project-manager
  21. https://gmhplanning.co.uk/nec-guidance-notes/ecc-clause-14-project-manager-and-supervisor/
  22. https://www.neccontract.com/news/research-finds-nec-reduces-infrastructure-disputes
  23. https://www.neccontract.com/getmedia/911bd7ed-9984-49c4-9c9e-d355b49f8326/R-Patterson-Risk-paper-MPL-Nov-2009-as-on-NEC-website-Feb-2019.pdf
  24. https://www.neccontract.com/news/compensation-events-an-introduction-for-new-nec-users
  25. https://www.neccontract.com/news/how-to-avoid-cumulative-delay-and-disruption-disputes-in-nec-contracts
  26. https://www.neccontract.com/products/contracts/nec4/engineering-and-construction-contract/option-e
  27. https://www.neccontract.com/products/contracts/nec4/engineering-and-construction-contract/ecsc
  28. https://www.neccontract.com/projects/crossrail-london-uk
  29. https://www.neccontract.com/products/contracts/nec4/professional-service-contract/psc
  30. https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/Notice/Attachment/52b34a78-a239-4a21-afab-c9024576a93e
  31. https://www.neccontract.com/products/contracts/nec4/term-service-contract/tsc
  32. https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/notice/45d78d2e-e855-445e-8485-f166285bd025
  33. https://www.neccontract.com/products/contracts/nec4/supply-contract/sc
  34. https://www.neccontract.com/products/contracts/nec4/supply-contract/ssc
  35. https://www.neccontract.com/getmedia/234a23f1-6736-4785-8aab-a07af58789e1/Practice-Note-4_finalweb
  36. https://www.neccontract.com/products/contracts/nec4/alliance-contract/alc
  37. https://www.apm.org.uk/media/kjzotx4v/nec-contracts-questions-answered.pdf
  38. https://metroun.co.uk/nec-series/nec3-4-disallowed-cost-explained/
  39. https://www.fenwickelliott.com/sites/default/files/nec_target_cost_contracts_-_what_you_need_to_know_-_fenwick_elliott.pdf
  40. https://www.neccontract.com/getmedia/adfd00c6-50da-4a86-962b-3d3f26de758f/Procurement-and-Contract-Strategies-2013.pdf.aspx
  41. https://www.neccontract.com/products/contracts/nec4/engineering-and-construction-contract/ecc
  42. https://sypro.co.uk/blogs/understanding-secondary-options-in-nec4-ecc/
  43. https://www.neccontract.com/news/final-version-of-x29-released
  44. https://www.neccontract.com/getmedia/80787e28-04d3-438e-98f7-b36f302f8afb/NEC-and-Z-clauses-Webinar-Slides.pdf.aspx
  45. https://ww3.rics.org/uk/en/journals/construction-journal/z-clause-nec-amendments-increase-contract-risks.html
  46. https://metroun.co.uk/nec-series/nec3-4-z-clauses-explained/
  47. https://www.neccontract.com/why-choose-nec/how-nec-can-help
  48. https://www.neccontract.com/getmedia/3d1b7c3f-097d-4504-8b1f-5a944dbc19dc/A-comparison-of-NEC-and-JCT.pdf.aspx
  49. https://www.causeway.com/blog/nec-contracts-explained-the-ultimate-guide
  50. https://www.neccontract.com/getmedia/6a050f6a-9969-497c-8f89-7f7f9d670396/engineering-and-construction-contract-guidance-notes.pdf.aspx
  51. https://www.neccontract.com/products/contracts/nec3/guidance-notes-and-flow-charts/nec3-engineering-and-construction-contract-guidance-notes
  52. https://www.neccontract.com/resources/practice-notes
  53. https://www.neccontract.com/news/nec4-2023-amendments
  54. https://www.neccontract.com/getmedia/927fb0b0-eab4-406d-895e-7e3f14b4627a/NEC4_FAC-1-Guidance-Notes.pdf?ext=.pdf
  55. https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/guidance/nec-contracts-key-considerations
  56. https://www.neccontract.com/products/contracts/hk-edition/user-guides-and-flow-charts-hong-kong-edition
  57. https://www.neccontract.com/news/uk-government-launches-nec-contracts-for-high-speed-two
  58. https://www.neccontract.com/news/nec-around-the-world
  59. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202411/28/P2024112700447.htm
  60. https://www.ecs.co.za/ecs-news/
  61. https://www.neccontract.com/products/training/nec4-ecc-project-manager-accreditation
  62. https://www.apm.org.uk/resources/find-a-resource/case-studies/nec3-case-study-crossrail/
  63. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202211/23/P2022112300348p.htm
  64. https://oeuk.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Offshore-Energies-Magazine-Winter-2022-23-OEUK.pdf
  65. https://ineight.com/blog/ways-an-integrated-platform-can-help-manage-nec4-contracts/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.