Back To Back License Agreement
There are therefore clear benefits for contractors in the implementation of return agreements. However, in practice, it can be difficult to conclude back-to-back agreements. In response to industry demand, FIDIC is currently preparing a subcontract for work developed by the employer for subcontracting, which will be supported by the 1999 FIDIC books Red1 and Pink2. In November 2009, FIDIC published a test issue of the sub-contract for comments. The test edition is largely well worded, but some pass-down provisions could be linked to a revision in the final version to be published this year. The dispute resolution clauses in the trial number attempt to address the three issues mentioned above, but unfortunately they are somewhat absent and pose significant risks to both the principal contractor and the subcontractor. Here, too, it is hoped that these issues will be resolved in the final version. For a more detailed comment on the FIDIC test sub-contract, click here. Back-back agreements, where a principal contractor attempts to entrust obligations and commitments to the employer to his subcontractors, are becoming more common in construction projects.
While they may be a convenient way to transfer risks and commitments down the chain of responsibility, inadequate wording can lead to particularly complex and difficult-to-resolve disputes. There is no single stop solution for the various possible pitfalls associated with back-to-back contracts. Regardless of the approach taken to the development of back-to-back contracts, the decision should never be motivated by the intention to reduce a rigorously rigorous design process. Both the main contractors and the subcontractors will have a strong interest in the properly developed subcontracting. In addition, in a series of subcontractings, the principal contractor must ensure that its main contractual obligations are properly distributed among the various subcontractors and that they are not omitted without knowing it. The first approach is often seen by contractors as the simplest and therefore most cost-effective way to reduce debt.