NEC ECC - Referencing other documents from Contract Data Part One

There are occasions when, for simplicity, it would appear to make sense to cross-refer from the Contract Data Part One to other documents/drawings within the Site Information (SI) or the Works Information (WI).

The WI is of course, in accordance with clause 11.2(19), information which either specifies and describes the works or states any constraints on how the Contractor Provides the Works.

The SI is, in accordance with clause 11.2(6) , information which describes the Site and its surroundings and is in the documents which the Contract Data states it is in.

For the purposes of discussion, lets consider the boundaries of site. As shown in the Guidance Notes, you can cross-refer to a drawing to describe the boundaries of the site. But where does this drawing contractually belong? Is it SI (as it describes the Site) or is it WI (as it describes a constraint on how the Contractor Provides the Works) Or, should it be appended to (and become part of) the Contract Data Part One document?

Some advice on this would be appreciated.

If the boundaries of site drawing should be appended to the Contract Data (and become part of it), it cannot be changed (if this proves necessary) without the agreement of the Parties under clause 12.3.

If it is, or should be, Works Information, it can be changed (if needed) presumably by the PM as an instruction under clause 14.3.

If it is Site Information, it cannot be changed.

Whilst the boundaries of site is used as an example above, the same question could equally apply to sectional completion or access dates, i.e. can we cross-refer from the Contract Data to elements of the WI for the purposes of clarity/ simplicity?

If we can, does the PM then have the authority to change these elements under clause 14.3 with protection afforded to the contractor under clause 60.1(1).

My view is that if the ‘boundaries of the site’ were defined by reference to a drawing, then regardless of whether that drawing was subsequently changed by the PM as an instruction changing the Works Information, then the ORIGINAL drawing would still stand as defining the boundaries. As the PM has no power to change Site Information, this situation contractually could not occur.

For sectional Completion Dates and access dates, I see no reason why you would reference another document, but the same principle would apply if the contract compiler had done so.


Thanks, for the avoidance of doubt, is the boundaries of the site deemed Site Information or Works Information or Contract Data?

It is neither. The ‘boundaries of the site’ are whatever drawing/document is/are referenced from Contract Data part 1 as such. That could include a document which is also part of the original Works Information or the Site Information.

The Working Areas, which are defined as the Site and [any other areas specified by the Contractor] define the areas in which the Contractor is paid Defined Cost (excluding off-WA design and manufacture) non-Defined Costs being in the fee percentage. It therefore has a different purpose from the Works Info and the Site Info, so is a different thing !