JCT vs NEC vs FIDIC: what actually changes for a contractor
Updated: Oct 19
By Roman Bazelchuk | NEC Accredited Project Manager | APMG Project Planning and Control
Founder, NEC Planning Solutions Ltd
JCT vs NEC vs FIDIC comes down to the programme and the notice. JCT's master programme adds no obligation, and late notice still allows a later Completion Date. NEC measures delay on the Accepted Programme and, with exceptions, changes nothing for an event notified over eight weeks after awareness. FIDIC's 28-day bar can be relaxed.
About 60% of the projects I have planned ran on NEC, 20% on JCT and 20% on FIDIC. The three contracts use the same words, programme, notice and extension of time, and give each of them a different job. A team that carries one contract's habits into the next pays for it.
The costliest case I have seen was a team that brought its FIDIC habits to an NEC job. The programme was not treated as seriously as NEC needs. By the time the compensation events were assessed, the assessments had become too complicated and too late, and some events had passed the eight-week notification bar.
This guide sets the three contracts side by side, follows one event through each of them week by week, and reads three court cases with the programme at their centre. The pair comparisons go deeper: FIDIC vs NEC on the programme and claims, and JCT vs NEC notices on which late notice costs money.
JCT vs NEC vs FIDIC at a glance
Table 1 sets the JCT Standard Building Contract 2016 against the NEC4 ECC and the FIDIC 2017 Red Book on the points where one contract's habits cost money in another, with the clause that governs each. The JCT column is the 2016 edition, with the 2024 edition's shorter decision period noted where it differs.
Point | JCT SBC 2016 | NEC4 ECC | FIDIC 2017 Red Book |
The programme | Master programme as soon as possible after the execution of the contract (2.9.1.2), revised within 14 days of a decision fixing a later Completion Date or of agreeing a Pre-agreed Adjustment (2.9.2). It imposes no obligation beyond the Contract Documents (2.9.3) | First programme within the period the Contract Data states, unless one is identified there (31.1). Accepted, or reasons given, within two weeks (31.3). Revised at no longer interval than the Contract Data states (32.2) | Initial programme within 28 days of receiving the Notice of the Commencement Date. The Engineer may give Notice that it does not comply within 21 days of receiving it, or 14 days for a revised one, otherwise a No-objection is deemed. Revised when it no longer reflects actual progress or is otherwise inconsistent with the Contractor's obligations (8.3) |
The delay notice | Forthwith, once it becomes reasonably apparent that progress is being or is likely to be delayed (2.27). No sanction is stated for lateness, and a later Completion Date can still be fixed (2.28) | Within eight weeks of becoming aware the event has happened, or the Prices and dates do not change, except for events arising from the Project Manager's or Supervisor's own instruction, notification, certificate or changed decision (61.3) | Notice of Claim within 28 days after the Contractor became aware, or should have become aware, of the event (20.2.1). A late Notice is deemed valid if the Engineer gives no Notice within 14 days, though the Employer can still dispute it (20.2.2), and a late submission can be found justified (20.2.5). Fully detailed Claim within 84 days of the same point (20.2.4) |
Who decides time, and how fast | The Architect or Contract Administrator, within 12 weeks of the required particulars (2.28). Under the 2024 edition, 14 days to ask for further particulars and eight weeks to decide | The Project Manager replies to a quotation within two weeks (62.3), or assesses the event itself (64) | The Engineer: 42 days to reach agreement after the fully detailed Claim, then 42 days to determine (3.7) |
What delay is measured against | Whether completion is likely to be delayed beyond the Completion Date by a Relevant Event (2.28) | Planned Completion on the Accepted Programme current at the dividing date (63.5) | Whether completion is or will be delayed by a listed cause (8.5). No method is prescribed |
The money for the same event | Loss and expense, under its own notice (4.20 to 4.24, the Relevant Matters at 4.22) | Defined Cost plus the Fee, assessed with the time in one quotation (62.2, 63.1) | Cost, or Cost Plus Profit where the Sub-Clause gives it, in the same Claim (20.2) |
Damages for late completion | Liquidated damages at the Contract Particulars rate (2.32), once a Non-Completion Certificate has been issued (2.31) and the Employer has notified the Contractor, before the Final Certificate, that it may require or deduct them (2.32.1) | Delay damages only where Option X7 applies, at the Contract Data rate. Without X7, proven loss as general damages | Delay Damages at the daily amount in the Contract Data, up to the maximum stated there (8.8) |
Table 1: JCT SBC 2016, NEC4 ECC and FIDIC 2017 Red Book on the programme, time and money, clause by clause
Read across the rows and FIDIC sits closer to NEC than to JCT on time. Both put a bar on the notice, eight weeks under NEC and 28 days under FIDIC, and both put a clock on the reply to a programme: two weeks for acceptance under NEC, and under FIDIC 21 days for the Engineer's Notice on the initial programme and 14 days on a revised one. JCT asks for a master programme and sets no reply to it.
The row that matters most to a planner is the fourth. NEC names the programme delay is measured on. JCT and FIDIC do not, so under those two the programme is evidence, strong or weak, rather than the measure. Figure 1 shows how often each contract makes the programme a contractual act.
One late-access event under each contract
Take one event and run it through all three contracts. A few weeks into the job, the Client or Employer has not given access to part of the site by the date it was due, and the work planned there cannot start. Each contract treats that as the employer's risk for time and money: a compensation event under NEC4 (60.1(2)), a Relevant Event for time and a Relevant Matter for money under JCT (2.29, 4.22), and a ground for an extension of time and Cost Plus Profit under FIDIC, except to the extent that the contractor's own error or delay caused the failure (2.1). What differs is what the contractor has to do, by when, and what the programme does.
Under NEC4 the contractor notifies within eight weeks of becoming aware (61.3), and the compensation event time bar guide takes each step in turn. The Project Manager replies within one week (61.4), normally with an instruction to submit a quotation. The quotation follows within three weeks and the Project Manager replies within two (62.3). It carries the time and the money together, with the delay measured on the Accepted Programme current at the dividing date (63.5). Notified in week one, the event can be settled by week seven.
Under the JCT Standard Building Contract the contractor gives notice forthwith once it becomes reasonably apparent that progress is being or is likely to be delayed, with particulars and an estimate in the notice or as soon as possible after it (2.27). The Architect or Contract Administrator then has 12 weeks from the required particulars to decide (2.28). The 2024 edition cuts that to eight weeks and allows 14 days to ask for further particulars, with the eight weeks then running from their receipt. The master programme is revised within 14 days of a decision fixing a later Completion Date (2.9.2). The money travels separately, under its own loss and expense notice (4.21), set out in Relevant Events vs compensation events. With the particulars sent in week one, the decision can run to week 13, or to week 9 under the 2024 edition unless further particulars are asked for.
Under the FIDIC 2017 Red Book the Notice of Claim is due within 28 days after the contractor became aware, or should have become aware, of the event (20.2.1), and the fully detailed Claim within 84 days of the same point, with the contemporary records and the contractual or other legal basis (20.2.4). The Engineer then has 42 days to reach agreement and a further 42 to determine (3.7), and a Claim not determined in time is treated as rejected. Meanwhile a Programme that no longer reflects progress is revised (8.3). With every period used in full, the determination falls due around week 24. How the claim is built is set out in the FIDIC extension of time guide.
The drawing shows why the same team gets different results. Under NEC the answer comes within weeks and the programme carries it. Under JCT a late time notice does not bar an extension, but the decision can take months and the money waits on its own notice. Under FIDIC the time bar comes first and the decision last, so the programme record kept in between is what the claim stands on.
What the courts did with the programme under each contract
Three judgments, one from each family of contracts, show what happens when the programme is not doing the job its contract gives it. Two were decided on older forms, JCT 1998 and the FIDIC 1999 Yellow Book.
NEC4: an award built on a programme nobody had accepted
Premier Modular v Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust concerned a barn theatre built under a contract "based on the NEC4 Option A" (paragraph 11). The contractor said it needed a permanent mains water supply by 30 October 2023, and an adjudicator awarded it £1,655,385.49 (paragraphs 1 and 13). Both parties treated the programme in the contract as the only Accepted Programme, and the Project Manager never accepted a later one (paragraphs 14 and 25).
The adjudicator found a compensation event under clause 60.1(3) on dates in a revised programme "which neither party said was an Accepted Programme", while "the Accepted Programme contained no such dates" (paragraph 42). It was "a breach of the rules of natural justice" not to put that to the parties, and the application to enforce the award was dismissed (paragraphs 42 and 51, [2026] EWHC 1404 (TCC)). The case note on Premier Modular sets out the rest.
For a planner the lesson sits before the adjudication. The contractor's own case was that delay "should be assessed by reference to a later, unaccepted programme" (paragraph 23). Under NEC4 a compensation event's delay is measured on the Accepted Programme current at the dividing date (63.5), so the revision meant to carry it needs to be accepted, or treated as accepted, by then.
JCT: an extension rebuilt without a usable programme
Walter Lilly v Mackay was decided on the JCT Standard Form of Building Contract 1998 Edition Private Without Quantities, with a Contractor's Designed Portion Supplement and amendments (paragraph 102). Within 12 weeks after practical completion, the Architect had to review the Completion Date "whether or not the Relevant Event has been specifically notified" (clause 25.3.3, set out at paragraph 124), a final exercise carried out "irrespective of whether notices and the particulars have been provided" (paragraph 125(e)).
The programme was the weak point. Both delay experts accepted that critical delay is generally found along "the longest path through the project". In "the absence of any usable contemporaneous programme from early 2007 onwards", the judge preferred the expert who took "a much more objective approach" (paragraph 98). Against a Date for Completion of 23 January 2006 (paragraph 11), the contractor was found entitled to an extension of time to 7 July 2008, when the works were practically complete ([2012] EWHC 1773 (TCC)).
Under JCT the contract kept the time question open after practical completion, and the answer came from a delay analysis rebuilt from events, because the programme had stopped being usable. The money is stricter. In FES v HFD, on the Scottish Standard Building Contract with Quantities 2016, the clause the court read, 4.20.1, "comes directly and unaltered" from that standard form, with the same wording in the JCT 2016 edition (paragraph 53). It makes the contractor's entitlement to loss and expense subject to compliance with clause 4.21, which sets out the notice. The court found it "difficult to construe this language other than that it creates a condition precedent" (paragraph 54, [2024] CSOH 20), and the appeal was refused ([2024] CSIH 37).
FIDIC: a compliant programme, already out of date
Obrascon Huarte Lain v Attorney General for Gibraltar concerned a contract of about £30 million, signed in November 2008, on the FIDIC Yellow Book, 1st Edition 1999, with some relatively minor changes (paragraphs 10 and 11). Of four programmes produced between December 2008 and March 2009, only the last "was contractually compliant", and "this programme, although compliant, was in reality already (or shortly thereafter) out of date" (paragraph 40).
The judge held, as the contractor's counsel accepted, that the 28-day notice under Sub-Clause 20.1 was a condition precedent, to be read reasonably broadly, with time running from when it was clear there would be delay or when the delay had started. One claim for weather delay failed because the notice was not given within 28 days. In the end the contractor obtained one day's extension of time, and the employer's termination was upheld ([2014] EWHC 1028 (TCC), and [2015] EWCA Civ 712, paragraphs 77 and 151).
Under FIDIC the programme record and the notice clock run side by side. The 2017 Red Book lets a late Notice of Claim be saved under 20.2.2 and 20.2.5, but it adds a second bar: a Notice of Claim can lapse if the fully detailed Claim does not state its contractual or other legal basis in time (20.2.4). The Programme still has to be revised whenever it stops reflecting actual progress (8.3).
What I do when a job moves between contracts
On JCT jobs I run the programme with NEC rigour, but keep the JCT terms. Most of the time the client expects that rigour anyway. Construction is driven by the critical path, and the critical path can change with every update. The JCT master programme guide sets out what the contract itself asks for.
I have worked on FIDIC many times. On FIDIC jobs the claims for time go in anyway, and they are decided on the quality of the evidence, before any tribunal is involved.
NEC runs the other way round. The contract measures the delay from each compensation event on the Accepted Programme, so a programme that is not kept current makes every assessment harder and slower. That is what happened to the team that brought its FIDIC habits to an NEC job.
NEC Planning Solutions reviews programmes against the contract they sit under, NEC, JCT or FIDIC, as part of its programme review and recovery service.
An independent programme review starts from £1,250 plus VAT.
The author's view
In my view NEC is the best of the three for the contractor's programme, because it is the most prescriptive about it. The contract says what the programme must show, how fast the Project Manager must answer, and that delay is measured on the Accepted Programme. A contractor who keeps that programme current has the clearest route to time and money of the three forms.
JCT and FIDIC leave more to the evidence. That is not a weakness if the programme is kept with the same rigour anyway, which is how I run both. The risk is a team that relaxes because the contract does.
Download the First 30 Days checklist
The first month on an NEC job for a team coming from JCT, in two pages: reading the Contract Data, getting a first programme accepted, opening the early warning register, starting the compensation event clock, and setting up cost records for Defined Cost. Direct download, no sign-up.
JCT vs NEC vs FIDIC: frequently asked questions
What is the difference between JCT and NEC, and where does FIDIC sit?
JCT treats the master programme as information and runs time and money on separate notices. NEC measures delay on the Accepted Programme and settles time and money together as compensation events, with an eight-week notification bar. FIDIC sits between them: a 28-day Notice of Claim that can be relaxed, a programme the Engineer reviews by exception, and claims decided on the records.
Is the programme a contract document under JCT, NEC and FIDIC?
Under the JCT Standard Building Contract the master programme imposes no obligation beyond the Contract Documents (2.9.3). Under FIDIC 2017 the Programme is not one of the documents forming the Contract, but the Contractor proceeds in accordance with it (8.3). Under NEC4 the Accepted Programme is a defined term (11.2(1)), and delay is assessed on it (63.5).
Which contract puts a time bar on a late delay notice?
NEC4 and FIDIC do. Under NEC4 an event notified over eight weeks after the contractor became aware changes neither the Prices nor the dates, unless it arose from the Project Manager's or Supervisor's own instruction, notification, certificate or changed decision (61.3). FIDIC's Notice of Claim is due within 28 days of actual or constructive awareness (20.2.1), but a late one can be saved (20.2.2, 20.2.5). JCT states no sanction.
How long does each contract give to decide an extension of time?
Under NEC4 the Project Manager replies to a quotation within two weeks (62.3), and an event can be settled about six weeks after it is notified. Under the JCT Standard Building Contract 2016 the Architect or Contract Administrator has 12 weeks from the required particulars (2.28), and the 2024 edition cuts that to eight. Under FIDIC 2017 the Engineer has 42 days to agree and 42 more to determine (3.7).
What does a claim review check under JCT, NEC and FIDIC?
Three things, in this order. Whether each notice went in on time under the contract's own rule. Whether the programme the claim stands on is the right one: the Accepted Programme at the dividing date under NEC, the master programme and its revisions under JCT, the Programme and its revisions under FIDIC. And whether the records prove the effect the programme shows.
About the author
Roman Bazelchuk is the Founder of NEC Planning Solutions Ltd, a UK project planning and controls consultancy supporting contractors with NEC programme compliance, compensation event assessments and live project controls. He is an NEC Accredited Project Manager and holds the APMG Project Planning and Control qualification, with a BEng in Mechanical Engineering and postgraduate training in Planning and Control.
NEC Planning Solutions provides contract-aware planning support through a QA-governed delivery model, helping project teams keep programmes accepted, current and commercially useful from tender through to live delivery.
Arrange a consultation
First NEC job after years of JCT? We will pick out the habits that will cost your team money in the first month, and set the programme and registers up before they settle in. The first consultation is 30 minutes with Roman Bazelchuk, Director, confidential, with no documents needed in advance. Email info@necplanningsolutions.co.uk or call 0330 223 7709. Our programme compliance support is set out here.
