Hypothetical scenario here but one im interested to know. This would be an unamended NEC4 Option A contract for example.
Client wants to reduce scope, which happens to be at the end of our current programme.
Client is rightly entitled to the omission of cost of the direct scope, but, as they are not entitled to reduce the programme, are they entitled to the cost saving of our prelim items due to the fact we can now finish site earlier? For this scenario, assume no acceleration has been requested, this is just coincidental that the scope no longer required is at the end of our critical path.