According to Cl 14.3, the PM can “change” a Key Date, which means it can either bring the Key Date foreward or backward. The instruction will then constitute a CE under Cl. 60.1(4) and its effect on time and cost will be assessed in accordance with Cl. 63.1 and Cl. 63.5 respectively.
However, Cl. 63.5 mentions that “A delay to a Key Date is assessed…”. What if the instruction is to bring forward a Key Date, and Cl. 63.5 doesn’t seems to allow to bring forward the Key Date.
For my case, amended secondary option X7 is adopted and any delay in meeting the condition of a Key Date will be subjected to Delay Damages. Therefore, should it be better dealt with by Cl. 36 instead?
2 Likes
@Enzof400 that is a very interesting question.
In this case you are obviously not dealing with delay (rather the opposite), therefore clause 63.5 - which addresses the assessment of delay - does not apply.
As you correctly mentioned, clause 14.3 allows the Project Manager to bring forward a Key Date, which constitutes a compensation event. The event would be assessed as any other (i.e. by assessing the impact on Defined Cost) but with no impact assessed on the planned Completion.
In my view, it is essentially an instruction for “acceleration” of a Key Date but without the requirements of clause 36 (accepting the Contractor’s quotation first or the Contractor’s right to decline).
I hope this helps.
1 Like