The answer appears the sensible logical approach but if a condition stipulated within the WI Project Constraints was ’ All works to be are to be completed by the Completion Date’ I am still struggling to justify contractually why the programme can’t be rejected given it would not comply with this WI
This is not something that is necessary or helpful to do contractually in Works Information. Just by adding “you have to do all the Works by the Completion Date” does not now make this a new requirement and a reason you can reject a programme. This would suggest that every CE would have to be made to fit the original Completion Date, and any Contractor delay they would be obliged to mitigate any delay at any cost to achieve the Completion Date.
It may be impossible for a Contractor to accelerate and their programme is showing that they are running late, and they will be liable for Delay Damages under X7. This should not be a programme that the Project Manager now rejects. The Project Manager may not like it, but equally if he accepts is not saying he is happy and he certainly is not accepting the late running planned Completion as the revised Completion Date. If you look at the reasons for rejection there is not one in 31.3 that says “I don’t like the end date” and just by adding a “throw away” line in Works Information that you have to meet the completion Date should not give you the reason to reject the programme. If it was necessary or that simple the original drafting of the contract would include it for you.
It is in both Parties interest to have a regular Accepted Programme throughout the life of the project and not accepting one here would be unhelpful to both Parties. You should set a Completion Date in contract data part 1, and fix delay damages in X7 that “encourage the Contractor to finish on time.