FIDIC Yellow: Is it necessary to formally refer to the Clause under which you are claiming for a particular claim / delay?

We have notified the Client of a particular claim / delay with sufficient detail, and also suggested potentially mitigating measures etc. as required under the Contract (ie. within the time constraint requirement), we also subsequently provided an updated Programme detailing the impact of the delay, but we didn’t formally refer to the Clauses under which we are claiming, ie. we did not include text along the following lines “in accordance with Clause 20.1 of the Contract, we give notice that a delay event has occurred, and this may increase the Subcontract Price.

Similarly, in accordance with Clause 8.4 of the Contract, we give notice that we are entitled to an Extension of Time for Completion.”

Are the specific references to “Clause 20.1” and “Clause 8.4” required for our Claim/delay to be deemed valid under Fidic, or is it valid regardless of a reference to the specific Clauses?

I don’t think it is a contractual or legal obligation to refer to the clause you are claiming under - just a bloomin good idea? For FIDIC or indeed any contract it is good to make it clear exactly what you are claiming for and why and in the first instance demonstrating what clause you are notifying under can only help. If you don’t state the clause, that communication should not however be null and void - they should still take it on face value.

This is where the use of cloud based administration tools (e.g. FastDraft) help as each form forces you to use the right language and will quote the clause for you on the form for you with out you even necessarily knowing it.