Hi Ashraf,
First of all, the main purpose of the time schedule is to control the construction process time which depends on the rates which in turn depend on the quantity.
So it is advisable to use the drawings quantities in the program which will reflect the suitable method statement.
But before that I think it is preferable to send a letter to the consultant to save your rights, if the quantity is increased to the the limit that will affect the completion date.
As you have the right to reprice the items with more quantities, and also to increase execution time.

Ashraf,

In an early post you stated:

1- Contract is remeasured contract.
2- the following points are mentioned in the preamble of the contract BOQ:
- Drawings, specifications , BOQ and all other documents are complementary and if any item is included in any of them , it shall be deemed included in all.
- The contractor shall not use these BOQ as a basis for a construction program or for the purpose of ordering materials or arranging sub-contractor.
- The whole of the quantities shall be treated as approximate only and are given to provide common basis for tendering.
We have also in the condition of contract clause 52.3 "Variations Exceedung 15%"that the contractor has the right to claim if if the amount of the contract increased or decreased by more than 155 of the effective contract price.


"The contractor shall not use the BOQ as a basis for a construction program" seems plain enough.

Cl52.3 gives you potentially more money, but does the contract elsewhere give you more time?

You don’t state what version oe edition of FIDIC you’re working under or if it been amended to account for the above.

Probably, unless the Client organisation could show that the particular clause was introduced by the Contractor

I wikipedia’ed the term and this is what I found,

"Contra proferentem is a rule of contractual interpretation which provides that a term which is found to be ambiguous should be construed against the party which imposed its inclusion in the contract. That is, the preferred interpretation will be the one most favourable to the party upon whom its inclusion was imposed. Or, more accurately against (the interests of) the party who imposed it. The rule only applies if, and to the extent that, the clause was included at the unilateral insistence of one party without having been subject to negotiation by the counter-party.

It translates from the Latin literally to mean "against (contra) the one bringing forth (the proferens)."

The reasoning behind this rule is to encourage the drafter of a contract to be as clear and explicit as possible and to take into account as many foreseeable situations as he can.

Additionally, the rule reflects the court’s inherent dislike of standard-form take-it-or-leave-it contracts also known as contracts of adhesion (e.g., standard form insurance contracts for individual consumers, residential leases, etc.). The court perceives such contracts to be the product of bargaining between parties in unfair or uneven positions. To mitigate this perceived unfairness, legal systems apply the doctrine of contra proferentem; giving the benefit of any doubt in favour of the party upon whom the contract was foisted. Some courts when seeking a particular result will use contra proferentem to take a strict approach against insurers and other powerful contracting parties and go so far as to interpret terms of the contract in favor of the other party, even where the meaning of a term would appear clear and unambiguous on its face, although this application is disfavored.

Contra proferentem also places the cost of losses on the party who was in the best position to avoid the harm. This is generally the person who drafted the contract. An example of this is the insurance contract, a great example of the contract of adhesion, above. There, the insurance company is the party that is completely in control of the terms of the contract and is generally in a better position to, for example, avoid contractual forfeiture. This is a principle of long standing. See, for example, California Civil Code §1654 (“In cases of uncertainty . . . the language of a contract should be interpreted most strongly against the party who caused the uncertainty to exist.") California enacted this section in 1872. Numerous other states have codified the rule as well.

International legislation such as the European Principles of Contract Law, have also codified this rule of law. Also, in the arbitration procedures of the International Chamber of Commerce there are (a few) cases in which arbitrators recall the principle of contra proferentem in their legal reasoning."

Clause 14 Program should be prepared as close as possible to the program that was Tendered and accepted by awarding the Contract.

Afterall a contract has to be what was contemplated at the time of award (offer, acceptance, meeting of minds, possibility of performance, legal, of sound mind, capacity to contract etc).

You should resist the notion that the Engineer can dictate to you how to run your business.

If the Engineer should insist on you programming the work in a manner not consistant with what you offered in your tender then you should insist that an instruction is given varying the work.

A programme is first and foremost a tool for managing the project, the answer therefore should be obvious.

Hi
Ashraf !

If you are a Contractor,just follow first paragraph of what NICOLAS said.

It will be good for you.

Cheers

Ashraf
Of course there are common principles how a contract should be - but there is no obligation that it must be.
Important is the content of the contract. Be careful, we planners are no attorneys/lawyers. Transfer this question to the experts.
For us it is diffucult as well because we don’t know in detail the complete contract.
Good luck
Dieter

Ashraf

The tender programme must be based on the tender drawings, not the BoQ. How can you know where a particular amount of a billed rate is to fall within the programme unless you refer to the drawings. The BoQ is merely a vehicle for payment, and a guide only to the amount of work to be done.

Similarly the Contract programme baseline must be based on the Contract drawings issued when the contract is signed. This may (and probaly will) be different to the drawings at tender stage.