A few times now I've had discussions with legal advisors asking why NEC contracts do not refer to certain UK statutes, CDM in particular. I can't really level with this apparent craving to refer to certain UK statutes in contracts. Why should a contract refer to any UK statute, it's not exactly an opt-in, opt-out set of rules? The exception that I can see are those statutes that do need complimentary provisions such as provided through Y(UK)2 or those that are a sort of opt-in, such as provided for in Y(UK)3.
I refer to an article printed in ribajournal.com linked below (to scroll down touch on the red vertical line, which took me a while to discover!!):
http://www.ribajournal.com/index.php/feature/article/why_make_life_more_complicated/
Anyway, in there it states "... the PSC does not contain specific provisions requiring the consultant to comply with the CDM Regulations. Clients therefore generally tend to insert a Z-clause to this effect (even though a consultant would be required to comply regardless of whether or not a provision had been included)..."
So, this looks like legal advice to me, you have to comply with UK statute. If anyone thinks a single sentence in a contract actually makes people design/build safer I think they are wrong. So can someone please tell me why on earth we can justify padding out contract terms with unnecessary references to UK statute that apply anyway?
Rob
Showing posts with label CDM. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CDM. Show all posts
Wednesday, 7 July 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)