Pausing Works Instruction issued by PM (NEC 3 ) ECS Option A

How should we proceed if we have received only an instruction Under clause 14.3 and 27.3 to pause ( no defined recommencement date ) work Packages until The Employer reviews affordability and criticality of works . The PM has not issued any CE to accompany the request and wants us to continue assisting only in the Handback process of Work packages .
Do We raise a notification of a CE under 60.1(4) and treat the instruction as a stop works as there is no mechanisms /recognition for pausing works for a unknown period under NEC 3 ?
What are our options for the Work Packages agreed and implemented are we entitled to claim ,lost profit ,demobilisation and stand-down costs of our site teams & management core teams if we can not re-deploy them elsewhere for the duration of agreed program.
how would we assess the interim final accounts COWD on Non -agreed CE work packages where we have progressed with works without agreement of our Quote , will we be at the mercy of the PM on those Non agreed works .

I am assuming you are under an Engineering and Construction Subcontract (ECS), although you make reference to the PM. In any case the principle of both the ECC and ECS forms is the same.

From what you have said the instruction seems very much like an instruction to ‘postpone’ works, unless it relates to a change in the scope of works (Works Information). I would give an early warning by notifying under sub-clause 16.1 and instructing the Contractor to attend a risk reduction meeting.

At the risk reduction meeting you need to clarify with the Contractor the ‘scope’ of their previous instruction and what it relates to. This is necessary to determine the effect on the progress of the works and what you should assess for the CE quotation. It is likely that an instruction has been given under the ‘main contract’, as you have mentioned the difficulties the Employer is currently facing, so the Contractor may be left in a similar position to yourself. However, that doesn’t mean that your contract shouldn’t be administered properly.

If this was an instruction to ‘postpone’ works and should have been given under sub-clause 34.1, then the matter is a compensation event under 60.1 (4), as you have said, which the Contractor should have notified at the time of the instruction. As this has not been notified by the Contractor, however, then I would suggest notifying the matter as a CE.

The costs ‘claimed’ for the CE are determined in accordance with sub-clause 63.1 and the Shorter Schedule of Cost Components. The quotation assessment should include for the effect of the CE, although this should be an easier assessment once you have clarified and confirmed the ‘scope’ of the ‘postponement’ instruction. Any ‘non productive’ working can be included, depending upon what measures are reasonable in your situation to re-deploy them, with consideration to the principles of ‘mitigation’ and ‘proximity’ etc.

If the ‘postponement’ continues for a period of more than 14 weeks then there is a right to terminate at sub-clause 91.6, if this relates to ‘substantial work’. The amount due would, however, be dependent upon who terminated and what reason the ‘postponement’ instruction was given.

For any ‘non-agreed’ CEs I presume that you have been formally instructed so the matter should be assessed in accordance with the CE procedure. I suggest that you review the current progress with these and take appropriate action where necessary, such as a ‘reminder’ under sub-clause 62.6 etc.