Claims for variations and scope changes are a core feature of modern construction projects and a frequent source of conflict within Construction & Projects Disputes. Because projects often evolve after contract execution, the ability to manage and value changes in scope is essential for maintaining progress, controlling costs, and protecting contractual rights. Variations may arise from design refinements, unforeseen site conditions, regulatory requirements, or employer-driven adjustments. When these changes are not properly documented, priced, or approved, disputes quickly escalate, affecting timelines, cash flow, and overall project delivery. This article examines how variation claims arise, the contractual mechanisms that govern them, and the strategies parties must use to avoid prolonged and costly disputes.
A variation refers to any change to the originally agreed scope of works. Most construction contracts, including FIDIC and bespoke UAE contracts, allow employers to instruct variations during the life of a project. These changes may impact time, cost, quality, or methodology, and must be evaluated according to the contract’s procedural and financial rules.
Whether a change constitutes a valid variation depends on the contract language and whether the instruction originates from an authorized representative.
Variation claims emerge when contractors assert entitlement to additional payment or time as a result of instructed or constructive changes. Key drivers include discrepancies between drawings, late design development, coordination failures, or under-defined project requirements. In some cases, employers issue variations informally, expecting the contractor to proceed without formal approval mechanisms. These situations often lead to disagreements over valuation and delay entitlements.
Constructive variations occur when the employer’s conduct, rather than explicit instruction, forces the contractor to carry out additional work. Examples include contradictory specifications, late approvals, or instructions that materially alter the original scope.
Most contracts include strict procedural obligations for processing variations. Failure to follow these procedures can jeopardize entitlement to payment or extensions of time.
Contractors are typically required to issue timely notices identifying the variation, its likely impact, and the contractual basis for the claim. Late notices may invalidate entitlement.
Accurate documentation is essential to proving variation claims. Contractors must maintain:
Contracts typically specify how variations should be valued. Common approaches include:
Variation disputes often arise when parties disagree on whether a variation was instructed, its valuation, or its impact on time.
In large projects, disputes can become complex due to overlapping variations, incomplete records, and multi-party involvement.
Proactive variation management helps avoid disputes and maintains project momentum. Best practices include:
Settling valuations and approvals early prevents accumulation of unresolved claims that may ultimately escalate into arbitration or litigation.
Variations often delay critical path activities. When this happens, contractors may be entitled to both:
Proper programme analysis is essential to demonstrate causation and quantify time-related impacts.
Claims for variations and scope changes are an inevitable part of complex construction projects. The key to managing them effectively lies in clear contract drafting, strict adherence to procedural requirements, and disciplined documentation. When parties follow structured processes and maintain open communication, variations can be addressed fairly and efficiently, reducing the likelihood of disputes and ensuring that projects progress without destabilizing cost or schedule impacts.
