Free Practice Questions for FIDIC CCM Exam

Under the FIDIC Red Book 1999, advance payment is a sum paid to the Contractor to help cash flow early in the project. It must be repaid through deductions from interim payments according to a specified schedule.

Sub-Clause 14.5 (Advance Payment) states that the Contractor must repay the advance payment by installments, typically by the Time for Completion. If the advance payment has not been fully repaid by the Time for Completion, the outstanding balance becomes immediately due and payable by the Contractor (Option A). This ensures the Employer recovers the advance by the time the project completes.

Additionally, upon termination of the Contract (Sub-Clause 15.2 or relevant termination clauses), any outstanding balance of the advance payment becomes immediately due (Option D). This protects the Employer’s financial interest if the Contract ends prematurely.

Option B (before the Performance Certificate is issued) and Option C (before the Taking-Over Certificate is issued) are not explicitly linked in FIDIC Red Book 1999 to triggering immediate repayment of the advance payment. The Taking-Over Certificate marks practical completion and may precede the final repayment schedule, while the Performance Certificate is issued after the Defects Notification Period.

Therefore, the correct situations for immediate repayment of outstanding advance payment balance are before Time for Completion and upon termination of the Contract.

Option C is not true because under the FIDIC Silver Book (1999 edition), the delay damages (liquidated damages) specified in the contract are intended as full compensation for the Employer’s loss resulting from late completion. The contract usually excludes other claims for actual losses or extra costs beyond the delay damages.

Option A is true; Variations can include extensions of time.

Option B is true; identifying delay causes is essential for claims and defences.

Option D is true; if the Employer causes suspension not attributable to the Contractor, delay damages claims by the Employer are generally unjustified.

Thus, the Employer cannot claim extra costs over and above delay damages as per typical Silver Book provisions.

Under the FIDIC Silver Book 1999, Clause 9 governs Tests on Completion, while Clause 12.4 addresses Tests after Completion. These provisions define performance verification before and after Taking-Over.

Option A is correct. Under Sub-Clause 9.4 [Failure to Pass Tests on Completion], if the Works fail the Tests on Completion, the Employer has several options, including accepting the Works subject to a reduction in the Contract Price. This reflects the commercial flexibility within FIDIC, allowing completion despite minor deficiencies, with financial adjustment.

Option D is also correct. Under Sub-Clause 12.4 [Failure to Pass Tests after Completion], if the Works fail post-completion performance tests, the Contractor may be required to pay performance damages. Once these damages are paid, the Works may be deemed to have satisfied the required performance levels. This mechanism ensures that operational deficiencies are compensated financially rather than requiring physical rectification in all cases.

Option B is incorrect because both Tests on Completion and Tests after Completion can coexist within the same contract; they serve different purposes (pre-taking-over vs post-taking-over performance verification).

Option C is incorrect because Tests after Completion are generally carried out by or under the responsibility of the Contractor, not solely the Employer, although the Employer may witness them.

These provisions demonstrate FIDIC’s structured approach to quality assurance and risk allocation across different project stages.

Option A is true: In emergencies, verbal notices are permitted with the requirement to follow up in writing.

Option D is true: Notices and communications may be sent in various formats including handwritten, typed, printed, or electronic systems.

Option B is incorrect; a notice does not necessarily have to be signed by all these representatives; it depends on the party issuing the notice.

Option C is incorrect; proof of receipt is ideal but not always strictly required for legal validity depending on contract provisions.

Under FIDIC 2017, Clause 8.3 [Programme] was significantly enhanced compared to the 1999 editions, introducing more detailed and stricter requirements for programme management and updating.

Option A is correct. The 2017 editions explicitly require the Contractor to revise and resubmit the Programme whenever it becomes inconsistent with actual progress. This strengthens proactive project control and ensures that the Programme remains a live and reliable management tool.

Option C is also correct. FIDIC 2017 emphasizes that revised programmes must accurately reflect actual progress and current circumstances, including sequencing, logic, and resources. This aligns with the broader 2017 philosophy of improved transparency and contract administration.

Option B is incorrect because FIDIC does not mandate specifying particular programming software; this remains at the Contractor’s discretion unless otherwise stated in Particular Conditions.

Option D is incorrect because submission of a programme within 28 days already existed in FIDIC 1999 (Sub-Clause 8.3), and therefore is not a “new” feature.

These enhancements reflect FIDIC 2017’s focus on active project management, early warning, and accurate planning, making the Programme a central tool for monitoring and controlling project performance.

All main FIDIC contract editions contain provisions that allow the Employer or Engineer to propose or instruct the Contractor to employ certain subcontractors (e.g., nominated subcontractors). The Contractor retains the right to refuse such subcontractors only for reasonable cause, which must be communicated formally.

This mechanism protects the Employer’s interests in subcontractor selection while safeguarding the Contractor’s right to reject subcontractors that may not be competent or suitable.

Therefore, the statement is true.

Option C is correct: The Contractor is entitled to financing charges (interest) on late payments, calculated as per the percentage specified in the Contract Data or corresponding Sub-Clause.

Option D is correct: The Contractor can suspend works or reduce progress after giving due notice, usually 21 days, if payments are not made on time.

Option A is incorrect; termination is not automatic right after the payment deadline expires.

Option B is incorrect; suspension requires prior notice rather than immediate action.

Option E is incorrect because the Contractor has additional remedies such as suspension, beyond just financing charges.

Under the FIDIC Red Book 2017 (similar principles apply in other editions), Sub-Clause 4.1 (“Contractor’s General Obligations”) and Sub-Clause 3.4 (“Delay Damages”) require both Employer and Contractor to notify the Engineer in advance about any events or circumstances which may delay the works or adversely affect the Contractor’s personnel or progress. This early notification ensures proper management and mitigation of risks that could impact the project timeline or quality.

Option A (Delay the execution of the Works or a Section) is a core reason for notification since delays affect the critical path and programme, requiring possible extensions or adjustments.

Option C (Adversely affect the work of the Contractor ' s Personnel) is also a valid reason because issues affecting workforce productivity or availability can impact project delivery.

On the other hand:

Option B (Decrease the Contract Price) is not a reason to notify. Changes in contract price usually arise from variations or claims but are not a “known or future event” requiring prior notification unless linked to a variation or compensation event.

Option D (Increase the performance of the Works when completed) is positive and does not negatively affect project progress or cost; therefore, it is not a reason for advance notification under these contract provisions.

Thus, the two not applicable reasons are B and D.

Under FIDIC Red Book 1999, Sub-Clause 17.3 defines Employer’s Risks, which include war, hostilities, rebellion, revolution, insurrection, or military/usurped power. The scenario clearly falls within “insurrection,” making it an Employer’s Risk. Consequently, under Sub-Clause 17.4, the Contractor is entitled to both Extension of Time (EOT) and Cost if such risks affect execution of the Works.

At this stage, the Engineer must acknowledge that the event qualifies as an Employer’s Risk and that entitlement in principle exists. However, the exact quantum of delay and Cost cannot yet be determined because the situation is ongoing. FIDIC practice allows for such claims to be assessed after the effects are known. Importantly, the Contractor has already provided notice, satisfying Sub-Clause 20.1 requirements.

Option B is incorrect because entitlement is not conditional upon the end of the event; only quantification is deferred. Option C is wrong because foreseeability does not negate Employer’s Risks explicitly listed in Sub-Clause 17.3. Option D misapplies Sub-Clause 2.1, which relates to access to the Site, not political violence or insurrection.

Therefore, Option A correctly reflects FIDIC principles: recognition of entitlement with later assessment of time and cost.

Option B is correct. Under FIDIC contracts, the Contractor must provide proof of how the Provisional Sum has been expended when requested by the Engineer. This ensures transparency and proper use of funds allocated as Provisional Sums.

Option A is incorrect; Provisional Sums are often used based on instructions from the Engineer or Employer.

Option C is incorrect because Provisional Sums are precisely intended to be used, in whole or in part, according to Engineer’s or Employer’s instructions.