Hi Sharon, we would very much like to plan in some more dates. Please watch our events pages and we will put up some more dates when available! Alternatively we are getting a number of requests from corproates looking to do on-site bespoke courses: if that is of interest please contact Annelise on: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Put a Variation of Price clause into the contract, based on output prices?
• Metro Trains
Thanks Graham - had considered that but not sure how the other alliance will respond to that.At the moment l am leaning towards an EOT on the submission in conjunction with a early works side letter to allow construction to commence. Rgds Richard
Transfer of title occurs when ownership of a product or asset passes from one party to another. Transfer of risk (in this context) relates to which party bears risk associated with loss or damage. While the two may occur simultaneously, often they do not. A review of INCOTERMS may assist you in understanding the variations. The rules also vary to some extent based on jurisdiction.
As an example, in some jurisdictions, risk of loss often passes when a product is delivered, but title may not pass until payment has been received. In others (such as the US), passing of title and risk of loss may be simultaneous, but the supplier retains a security interest (right of repossession). As you will see from this example, it is important to understand the linkage between these varoious rights and obligations.
• Reliance Defence Limited
• Baker Hughes, a GE Company
Additionally Title Transfer conceptually is how the parties want to address revenue recognition and Tax liabilities, considering ownership transfer is a taxable event.
Risk of Loss, if it is not defined in the contract is assumed to be happened on delivery for supply contract.
• New Zealand Defence Industry Association (NZDIA)
One message that consistently comes out of this research is the opportunity for the discussions on indemnities, liabilities and everything else on the most negotiated list, to take a backseat as a result of substantially greater focus on the most important terms like scope and goals. As certainty and confidence in getting these right increases, so can the opportunities to take a different view of risk and potentially see a relaxing of the position on liability and indemnity.
Looking back on my years as a GC I wish I had seen the Top Terms research and had the opportunity to stop obsessing about the legal risk management and focus more on the very outcomes that make these provisions less important.
Kent, thanks for sharing this - it is great to have practical examples of how this issue is being tackled successfully
When structured appropriately, there are certainly strong indicators that NEC contracts offer a sound framework for more successful outcomes. However, the evidence also points to the fact that just having the right contract won't fix performance issues. It must be accompanied by the right leadership and team attitudes. Essentially, there has to be a readiness to work collaboratively and to use the contract to support that effort, rather than as a weapon to enforce the right behaviour.
• New Zealand Defence Industry Association (NZDIA)
The NEC presentations at IACCM conference like this year's EMEA Conference always provoke interesting comment and debate about the potential for a whole new approach to contract drafting. The NEC presentations can be found in the IACCM library.
Yes I agree, please share with me, I would like to see the legislation and I have recently observed the change in contractor's attitude in negotiation from UK.
• Ministry of Justice
The most recent change is the implementation of the European Directives into UK Law, through the issue of the 2015 Public Contracts Regulations. This dictates Government procurement rather than standard commercial arrangements. Section 83 indicates a minimum contract record retention of the contract duration where they are over a certain value: As most contracts have an extended liability life of at least 6 years and as we have a wider obligation to maintain public records, then policy in my government Department is to err on the side of caution and retain for 6-7 years. The legislation is found HERE www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/102/pdfs/uksi_20150102_en.pdf
• Foreign and Commonwealth Office
I'm not sure what the change of law mentioned could relate to - other than what Shaun is referencing.
I would look to follow i) your organisations own information management policy (if it exists - as they should have taken account of relevant law/regulations for your company); or ii) if there is no records policy - then as Shaun says, capturing information and storing information based on the potential risk of claims which would be capped based on the Limitations Act 1980.
The only thing I'd add to point below (for England and Wales jurisdiction) is anything executed as a deed has a limitation period of twelve years rather than six.
• CitizenSteward International LLC
What is your current career field? Is it any way related to contract/commercial management? Also, are you more interested in working for a private-sector company in commercial contracts, or in the public-sector with government contracts?
My current career field is in banking/financial services as a compliance professional. The only thing I currently do that is remotely related to contract management is review statement of works. It interested me the most and lead me to the decision to pursue contract management as a new career, which is why I am working on the certification. I just need some actual experience. I am open to the idea of being in private or public sector. Any suggestions for volunteer opportunities are welcome.
I'm just trying to understand your position.
Considering that you are managing all contractual relationship with another company (buy and sell side) sounds actually good from your company perspective. It would mean, that your leadership can expect you to have a full overview about the contractually back and forth with this JF. Therefore I assume it's hard to change the mind of your leadership, since I would expect them to see your doublerole as positive.
However on the other side, there is your personal position, meaning being something in the middle of a sandwich, right? I'm not sure about your empowerment, but in worst case you have also very limited authority to change some company rules (discounts, penalties, payment conditions, acceptance criteria etc.). And on buy side you usually have different contractual expectation than on sell side. I assume, this is the tricky part in your situation. Fulfilling the internal requirements for buy- and sell side with the same contractual partner at the same time (and maybe also your partner asks you if you are a bit crazy, since requesting sooo different contracts when you are either on sell side or on buy side).
When the conditions your company expect in contracts are very different on sell side and buy side, this should be communicated as an issue (to your leadership). I think there are 2 options as solution: either the requested second CM as you suggest, or an escalation to the leadership to align clear buy and sell conditions between your company and the JF, which are equal to both parties. such framework conditions would make at least your position more clear. And maybe there won't be anymore need of a split of the CM roles buy side and sell side?
Since I couldn't find many information in your post, I hope, this is somehow helpful?
If your uncomfortable position has other reasons, please let me know.