United Arab Emirates: Bridging the contractual gap between an employer and a sub-contractor

Last Updated: 16 July 2010
Article by Eric Teo

What are the rights of an employer in the event a nominated sub-contractor fails to deliver the standard or quality of material and workmanship that the employer had expected to receive? Common wisdom dictates that the employer would ordinarily seek recourse against the main contractor for the sub-contractor's failure, but are there any alternatives?

To answer the above question we need to firstly understand that there are, in practice, two types of sub-contractors: domestic sub-contractors and nominated sub-contractors. Secondly, we should examine the contractual relationships between the three parties, i.e. the employer, the main contractor and the sub-contractor.

Nominated Sub-Contractor
By industry definition, nominated sub-contractors are contractors chosen by an employer who then contract directly with a main contractor to perform a specific scope of works. They are usually specialist trade contractors who would provide both the design and construction services. It is common practice for an employer to source and invite prospective nominated sub-contractors to participate in some form of procurement or bidding exercise. The employer will negotiate the commercial and legal terms with the successful sub-contractor, who will then enter into a sub-contract with a main contractor based upon those pre-agreed terms.

To facilitate the procurement of nominated sub-contractors, the conditions of a main contract will often contain provisions that allow an employer to select and nominate sub-contractors, an example is Clause 59 of the FIDIC 1987 4th edition Red Book Conditions of Contract (as for the FIDIC 1999 1st Edition Red Book see Clause 5). In return, a main contractor will usually receive additional money in the form of profit and attendance. The profit element is a form of compensation to the main contractor for the lost profit that it would have earned should it have been allowed to sub-let that part of the works for itself via a domestic sub-contractor. As to the attendance element it is intended to cover the necessary preliminaries expenses that a main contractor would incur in accommodating and managing the nominated sub-contractor as though it was its own domestic sub-contractor.

Apart from monetary compensation, it is also common practice to include in the conditions of a nominated sub-contract an indemnity by a nominated sub-contractor in favour of a main contractor. The indemnity is intended to protect a main contractor against any breach, default or negligence on the part of a sub-contractor in performing its obligations under the sub-contract. In addition, there should also be provisions which require a sub-contractor to ensure that a main contractor will not be in default of its own obligations under the main contract by reason of the nominated sub-contractor's actions. There are a number of standard form main contract conditions which entitle the main contractor to claim extension of time in the event that the project is delayed by the nominated sub-contractor (see for example the JCT Standard Form of Building Contract, which is widely used in the UK).

On the other hand, to the benefit of the nominated sub-contractor, main contract provisions would usually contain a payment mechanism that allows an employer to make direct payments to nominated sub-contractors in certain situation (see Sub-Clause 59.5 of the FIDIC 1987 Red Book). In this regard it is to be noted that Article 891 of the UAE Civil Code1 prohibits a sub-contractor from pursuing against the employer for money owed to it by the main contractor. Therefore, these direct payment provisions would to some extent provide an incentive for a nominated sub-contractor to contract with a lesser known main contractor. However, they are usually intended to work one way only. In other words, the employer has the sole discretion whether to exercise its rights to pay the sub-contractor directly when any such situation arises.

Domestic Sub-contractor
In relation to domestic sub-contractors, the main contractor retains its discretion to employ any number and any kind of sub-contractors as it sees fit in order to fulfill its obligations under the main contract. Such discretion is provided in Article 890(1) of the UAE Civil Code2 but it is subjected to restrictions that could be imposed under the main contract, for example Sub-Clause 4.1 of the 1987 FIDIC Red Book requires the main contractor to obtain prior consent before it is able to sub-contract any part of the works.

It is also an industry norm that a main contractor's obligations towards an employer would remain intact and unabated regardless of whether sub-contractors are domestic or nominated. In short, main contractors would be vicariously liable to employers for any failure, default or neglect on the part of its sub-contractors, be it nominated or domestic (see Sub-Clause 4.1 of 1987 FIDIC Red Book, this is supported by Article 890(2) of the UAE Civil Code3). This is the reason why most standard forms of main contract would allow a main contractor to raise objection against the nomination of any particular sub-contractor if it has reason to suspect the capability or ability of that particular sub-contractor (see Sub-Clause 5.2 of 1999 FIDIC Red Book).

Privity of Contract
Irrespective of whether a particular sub-contractor is a domestic or nominated sub-contractor, unless an employer and a sub-contractor enter into an agreement that is connected to the main contract or the project, neither party will have any contractual liability towards the other in relation to the main contract or the project. Therefore, it is not unusual for employers to require nominated sub-contractors to provide the former with direct warranties or indemnities in relation to the sub-contractors' performance.

These warranties and indemnities are, in effect, agreements between the employer and sub-contractor whereby the latter warrants or guarantees that the material, equipment or workmanship to be provided under the sub-contract will be of certain standard, quality or specification. However, depending on the terms of the agreement, a wider liability may be sought to be imposed upon a sub-contractor; for example, an indemnity for any failure under the terms of the sub-contract.

With the above in mind, it is interesting to note a recent decision of the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of first instance, Hong Kong Housing Authority v Rotegear Corporation Limited [2009] HKCFI 625. The Hong Kong Housing Authority (HKHA) was the employer of a mixed development project (the Project) and Rotegear Corporation Limited (RCL) was the nominated electrical works sub-contractor. In the proceedings, HKHA sued RCL for the recovery of damages due to the latter's failure to discharge its obligations under the sub-contract between RCL and the main contractor, Nishimatsu (the Sub-contract).

In the proceedings, RCL argued that HKHA did not have any right of action against it because between them there was no contractual relationship in existence. RCL argued that the proper party that HKHA should be seeking redress from was Nishimatsu. HKHA argued that RCL had warranted that it would carry out works under the sub-contract diligently in accordance to the main contractor's works program and without delay to the project, and such warranty gave HKHA the right to take action directly against RCL.

As it turned out prior to executing the sub-contract, RCL was invited by HKHA to tender for the electrical works of the Project. The successful tenderer was then required to enter into a sub-contract with HKHA's main contractor. The learned judge (Reyes J) concluded that the correspondence between HKHA and RCL during the tender stage gave rise to a contract between HKHA and RCL.

The form of tender submitted by RCL stated that it would "...complete the whole of the Sub-contract works without delay to the Main Works and to complete the whole of the Sub-contract works and any Section thereof in accordance with the Contractor's progress of the Main Works...". HKHA was concerned with the low tender price submitted by RCL and requested RCL to confirm the offer. In response to the request RCL confirmed its offer price by way of a letter wherein it stated: "...[w]e can mobilise all necessary resources for carrying out the Works to meet with the specified programme if the project was awarded to us."

The judge construed that the said form of tender together with RCL's confirmation letter constituted an offer by RCL in consideration for it to be nominated by HKHA as a sub-contractor to Nishimatsu and HKHA's subsequent nomination constituted an acceptance to that offer. Consequently, a contract between the parties had arisen and HKHA was entitled to recover from RCL additional costs and expenses as a result of securing a replacement sub-contractor.

In the proceedings, RCL was not legally represented, but instead, it was represented by its director. The judge rejected the director's argument that there should have been an express provision within the form of tender that provided HKHA the right to enforce a tenderer's promise before any direct action could be taken against RCL. RCL further stated that no sub-contractor would have intended that its promise given during a tender meeting would be actionable by HKHA.

The judge did not also agree with the argument that there must be a reciprocal right that would allow RCL to sue HKHA otherwise the promise made by RCL could not be enforced.

The above decision appears to have not given sufficient regard to the intent and purpose of the industry practice in relation to the nomination of sub-contractor. Even though Reyes J indicated that it was clear from the tender documents that the successful sub-contractor was to eventually enter into a sub-contract with the main contractor, and that HKHA's nomination was based upon the terms stipulated in the tender documents, he did not go on to discuss how the contract he found between the employer and the sub-contractor interacted with the sub-contract between the sub-contractor and the main contractor. This left unanswered two important questions. Firstly, assuming the main contractor had also instituted an action against RCL for its failure to carry out the sub-contract works diligently, could both the employer and the main contractor have recovered damages from RCL? Secondly, could RCL raise any limitation of liability clause that may be included in the sub-contract as a defence against the employer's claim?

Although this decision has no legal standing in the UAE, it nonetheless serves as a useful reminder to both nominated sub-contractors and employers operating in the UAE that they should always be mindful of the communications they exchange, and not to simply assume that by adopting a nomination mechanism of subcontracting it is given that neither of them would be liable to the other.

From a UAE law perspective, the decision above could have gone the other way, as unlike the approach taken by the learned judge in that case, local courts in the UAE would likely place more emphasis and importance on industry practice. There are plenty of provisions in the UAE Civil Code4 by which the law recognises a particular industry or custom practice as an unwritten but binding condition between contracting parties. Furthermore, the local courts would be more amenable to inquire into the intention of the parties by having regard to the nature and custom of the transaction5.

In the absence of a contractual nexus between an employer and a sub-contractor, neither of them would be able to sue the other for any of their action or inaction in connection with the project. The way in which the contractual gaps between an employer and a subcontractor can then be bridged is by way of an assignment of the main contractor's rights and liabilities. The assignment can take the form of a main contractor passing on its rights against an employer to a sub-contractor (see Article 891 of the UAE Civil Code) or its rights against a sub-contractor to an employer. It can also take the form that a main contractor drops out from the main contract and is substituted by a sub-contractor through a tri-partite agreement between all three parties (which is legally known as a novation).

However, a main contractor's freedom to assign is often curtailed by the conditions of the main contract. For example, Sub-Clause 3.1 of the 1987 FIDIC Red Book prohibits a main contractor from assigning any part of its contract without prior consent from an employer. And as one would imagine, very rarely would an employer be willing to provide its consent to facilitate a sub-contractor to seek recourse against it. On the other hand, Sub-Clauses 4.2 and 63.4 of the same conditions oblige a main contractor to assign the benefits of certain sub-contracts that it had entered into to an employer in particular circumstances.

Liability in Tort
Apart from an employer and a nominated sub-contractor entering into an agreement (or all three parties including the main contractor, if novation is to be adopted) in order to bridge the contractual gap between them, the law may also impose a liability in tort on either of the parties for negligent conduct or representation made to the other party. The English House of Lords decision of Independent Broadcasting Authority v EMI Electronics Ltd and BICC Construction Ltd (1980) 14 BLR 1 provides a good illustration.

In the above case, BICC was the nominated design and build sub-contractor to EMI who was the main contractor of IBA for the design and construction of a television aerial mast. The mast was cylindrical in shape and 1,250 feet tall. Before the construction of this mast, a similar but shorter mast was being built at another location and had experienced violent oscillation during its construction. As a result of this occurrence, a representative of IBA wrote to the chief designer of BICC suggesting to him that further investigation should be carried out to better understand the effect of a phenomenon known as vortex shedding: a phenomenon which would create varying lateral loadings on a cylindrical structure at varying wind speed and would therefore cause the cylindrical mast to oscillate. In response to this suggestion, the chief designer stated that the phenomenon was well known with cylindrical structures but BICC was satisfied that the mast would not oscillate dangerously. The representative of IBA relied on BICC's assurance that the mast would be safe and did not pursue his concern any further. The mast was completed in 1965 and collapsed in 1969.

On the facts, the House of Lords found that BICC was negligent for failing to consider the effect of ice loading in conjunction with the loading caused by vortex shedding at certain wind speed. As a result, the assurance given by BICC that the mast would not oscillate dangerously was held to be a negligent misstatement, and because it owed a duty of care to IBA it was found liable to compensate in tort. However, the House of Lords did not agree with the argument that the assurance given by BICC amounted to a collateral warranty which was actionable. The reason for this was because there was no evidence to suggest that either BICC or IBA had the intention to create a contractual relationship based upon the said assurance.

As mentioned above, employers and nominated sub-contractors need to be mindful of the contents and intents of their communications at all times, be it before or after the nomination and subsequent acceptance by a main contractor to enter into the eventual sub-contract. Even if, based on the conduct and representations made between an employer and a nominated sub-contractor, the law does not recognise the existence of a contract between the parties it may still find one of the parties to be liable to the other in tort (which is what happened in IBA v EMI and BICC). This is all more important because, unlike English law, the UAE laws relating to harm caused to others (i.e. tort) does not appear to prohibit a party from recovering pure economic loss6, i.e. compensation for purely financial loss as opposed to physical damage to property or personal injury.

Should the parties need to enter into a contract before a main contractor comes on board (probably because the employer wishes the sub-contractor to commence design work or procurement activity in advance), then it would be good risk management practice for that contract to be carefully substituted or replaced when the sub-contract is eventually entered into between the main contractor and the nominated sub-contractor. This can be done by novation or assignment, or by subsuming the terms of the initial contract into the subsequent sub-contract.

1 Article 891 states: A sub-contractor shall have no claim against the employer for anything due to him from the first contractor unless he has made an assignment to him against the employer.
2 Article 890(1) states: A contractor may entrust the performance of the whole or part of the work to another contractor unless he is prevented from so doing by a condition of the contract, or unless the nature of the work requires that he do it in person.
3 Article 890(2) states: The first contractor shall remain liable as towards the employer.
4 For example see Articles 46, 47, 50 and 264.
5 See Article 265 of the UAE Civil Code.
6 Article 292 states: In all cases the compensation shall be assessed on the basis the amount of harm suffered by the victim, together with loss of profit, provided that that is a natural result of the harmful act.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions