International Construction Law Review
INTRODUCTION
HUMPHREY LLOYD
DOUGLAS S JONES
This edition starts with a paper by Jacob Hamilton, a partner in Foyen Advokatfirma, Malmö, Sweden on “Understanding the Basic Features of Swedish Standard Construction Contracts” (at page 136). Mr Hamilton discusses two of the principal Swedish standard forms: AB 04 which is used for standard execution-only projects and ABT 06—the conditions for design and construct contracts. The purpose of Mr Hamilton’s article is to highlight differences between the forms used in Sweden and other forms. He does so against a background which will be familiar to readers, the absence in Sweden of an underlying civil or commercial code of the type found elsewhere. Contracts and standard conditions have therefore to be drafted on a self-standing basis. The forms were prepared by the Swedish Construction Contracts Committee as a result of lengthy negotiations. They are products of consensus, unlike other standard forms, which are promulgated with only consultation with representatives of other interests (and sometimes even without consultation).
We next have two papers on procurement. One looks at the statutory and other legal basis for Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) in Colombia and the other at how public procurement may be implemented in India under proposed legislation. Both are revisions of dissertations submitted for a Master’s degree. It is worth emphasising that we would be most interested to receive academic and other papers for consideration by our recently constituted Peer Review Board with a view to having them published in this Review, if approved by that Board, which may assist the author’s career and aspirations. Papers should be sent to us for transmission to the Board.
In the first paper, “Public-Private Partnerships in Colombia: Principles and Risk Allocation Schemes” (at page147), Juan Carlos Quinones provides an introduction to the use of PPPs in Colombia as a result of the enactment of Law 1508 of 2012. One of the most interesting features of this legislation is that it provides for the allocation of risk, e.g.: “the party who is best able to guarantee the continuous provision of the service, under circumstances in which a particular risk occurs, is the party who should bear that risk.” Article 4 also states that PPPs “must have an efficient allocation of risks, apportioning each one of the risks to the party who is best able to manage them, for mitigating the impact that the occurrence of such risks may have on the infrastructure availability and in the quality of the services provided.” The author examines other aspects of the apportionment of responsibilities, including how the new law may affect contractual liabilities and risks. He refers to cases to indicate how that apportionment might be considered by the courts and considers a number of practical examples. This study gives a most interesting insight into how much careful thought went into the Colombian legislation.
The International Construction Law Review [2013
134