FIDIC Sözleşmeleri’ndeki Yeniliklerin Değerlendirilmesi ve Eski Versiyonlarla Karşılaştırılması

Year 2021, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 504 - 518, 31.01.2021

Senem Bilir Mahçiçek , Nur Balkanlı Eryiğit Betül Yaylan Sevimli Gürkan Emre Gürcanlı

https://doi.org/10.31202/ecjse.831876

Abstract

Uluslararası ilişkilerin en fazla görüldüğü sektörlerden biri inşaat sektörüdür. Sektörün heterojen ve karmaşık yapısı düşünüldüğünde, inşaat projelerinin hedeflenen maliyet, süre ve kalitede tamamlanması son derece önemlidir. Bu noktada, proje yönetiminin alt başlıklarından sözleşme idaresinin profesyonel olarak yapılması gerekmektedir. İyi bir sözleşme idaresi ise ancak, doğru ve meslek profesyonelleri tarafından hazırlanmış nitelikli bir inşaat sözleşmesiyle mümkün olabilir. Günümüz ekonomik koşulları düşünüldüğünde, nitelikli bir yapım projesinin maliyetinin ön görülen maliyet sınırları içerisinde kalması ve tarafların arasında ilişkilerin korunması, uluslararası standartlarda hazırlanmış sözleşmeyle gerçekleşebilir. Ülkemizde ve dünya ülkelerinde, farklı standartta hazırlanmış farklı uluslararası sözleşme taslakları kullanılmaktadır. Ülkemizde ve Avrupa ülkelerinde daha çok FIDIC standart sözleşme taslaklarıyla yapılmış inşaat projeleri görmek mümkündür. Bu çalışmayla birlikte FIDIC Sarı Kitap sözleşme formlarının 1999 ve 2017 versiyonları arasındaki farklılıklar karşılaştırılarak, söz konusu iki versiyon arasındaki gelişmeler ve iyileştirmeler sunulmaktadır.

Keywords

Sözleşme standartları, uluslararası inşaat sözleşmeleri, FIDIC Sarı Kitap, FIDIC Kırmızı Kitap

Evaluation of the Improvements in FIDIC Contracts and Comparison with Older Versions

Abstract

Construction industry is the one of the most common sectors of internationalization. By taking into account the complex and heterogeneous structure of the construction industry, it is crucial to complete the construction projects, within the targeted cost, time and quality. Therefore, the construction administration, one of the subtitles of the construction project management, should be performed professionally. However, appropriate and satisfactory construction administration is just possible with the right and qualified contract, elaborated by the experts in the field. In addition, under today’s economic circumstances, keeping the total construction cost within the estimated cost boundaries of the qualified construction project, just directly related with the contract, prepared under the guidance of an international contract standard form. Many different international contract forms are used in all around the world but most common one is FIDIC Standard Contracts that have been used in Turkey and European Union countries for years. This research paper aims to investigate and evaluate the improvements and developments in FIDIC Standard Contracts and compare Yellow and Red Books 1999 and 2017 versions from the point of construction management principles and body of knowledge.

Keywords

Contract standards, international construction contracts, FIDIC Yellow Book, FIDIC Red Book

References

• [1]Alpkökin, P. (2017). Türk inşaat sektöründe uyuşmazlık çözüm kurulu uygulamaları. Karaelmas Science and Engineering Journal, 7(2), 674-683.).
• [2] Booen, P. L. (2000). The FIDIC contracts guide, Federation Internationale Des Ingineurs Conseile, Genève.
• [3] Bunni, N. G. (2005). The FIDIC forms of contract, Wiley-Blackwell, West Sussex, U.K.
• [4] Chen, Y., Wang, W., Zhang, S., & You, J. (2018). Understanding the multiple functions of construction contracts: the anatomy of FIDIC model contracts. Construction Management and Economics, 36(8), 472-485.
• [5] El-Adaway, I., Fawzy, S., Burrell, H., & Akroush, N. (2017). Studying payment provisions under national and international standard forms of contracts. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction, 9(2), 04516011.
• [6] FIDIC, (1999) Conditions of Contract for Construction, 1. Edition.
• [7] FIDIC, (1999) Conditions of Contract for Plant & Design Build, 1. Edition
• [8] FIDIC, (2017) Conditions of Contract for Construction, 2. Edition.
• [9] FIDIC, (2017) Conditions of Contract for Plant & Design Build, 2. Edition.
• [10] Glover, J. 2007. FIDIC: An overview. The latest developments, compari- sons, claims and force majeure. Fenwick Elliott, London: Construction Law Summer School.
• [11] Gunduz, M., & Elsherbeny, H. A. (2020). Operational framework for managing construction-contract administration practitioners’ perspective through modified Delphi method. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 146(3), 04019110.
• [12] Hardjomuljadi, S. (2020). Use of Dispute Avoidance and Adjudication Boards. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction, 12(4), 03720004.
• [13] Hillig, J.-B., D. Dan-Asabe, S. Donyavi, O. Dursun, and A. Thampuratty. 2010. “FIDIC’s Red Book 1999 edition: A study review.” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Manage. Procurement Law 163 (3): 129–133. https://doi .org/10.1680/mpal.2010.163.3.129.
• [14] Sadek, S. M. A. 2016. “Managing standard construction contractual forms modifications in the Middle East-overview and recommendations.” Ph.D. dissertation, School of Built Environment, Univ. of Salford.
• [15] Sanvido, Victor Ernest, and Mark Konchar. Selecting project delivery systems: Comparing design-build, design-bid-build and construction management at risk. Project Delivery Institute, 1999.
• [16] Sanni, A. G., Adebiyi, O. J., & Okorie, N. V. (2020). Residual Risks Of Payment Provisions In FIDIC And JCT Conditions: A Quantity Surveyor’s View. Open Journal of Physical Science (ISSN: 2734-2123), 1(1), 26-40.
• [17] Shnookal, T., and D. Charrett. 2010. “Standard form contracting; the role for FIDIC contracts domestically and internationally.” In Proc., Society of Construction Law Conf., 30. Sydney, NSW: Melbourne TEC Chambers.
• [18] Omran, M. E. (2019). A Review about FIDIC Contracts in Saudi Arabia. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 12, 36.
• [19] Wang, R., Lu, W., & Wei, Y. (2020). Owners’ use of contract-based power in construction project transactions: restrictions from process specificity and uncertainty. Construction Management and Economics, 1-16.