292) In France, it is provided for in art. 2224 and following arts of the Civil Code.

However,
the starting date of a limitation period varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction:
in some jurisdictions it is the date when the claim accrues while in others
it is the date on which the creditor knew, or should have known, of the
existence of the claim or, in the case of a sales contract, when the goods
were delivered.
Piero Bernardini ‘Limitation Periods’ in UNIDROIT Principles: New Developments and
Applications – 2005 Spec Supp ICC Int’l Ct Arb Bull 43.
293) Ibid. (Bernardini, 43).
294) Assuming the limitation period applicable to court actions applies to arbitrations.
In the US at least, this is not necessarily the case. Lance Currie and Monica
Gaudioso, ‘Are you SOL in Trying to Enforce a Statute of Limitations in Arbitration’
(2020) 22(1) UNDERCONSTRUCTION, ABA for Const L, 4.
295) The UNIDROIT Principles contain a Chapter 10 entitled ‘Limitations Periods’ and,
thus, treat the limitation of actions as a matter of substantive law governed by
those Principles. This is also the solution provided for by Rome I Regulation, art.
12(1)(d), applicable in the European Union. As the result of the English Foreign
Limitation Periods Act 1984, which applies to arbitrations having their seat in
England (see English Arbitration Act 1996, s 13), this also appears to be the position
now under English law. Chitty on Contracts, (33rd edn, Sweet & Maxwell, London,
2018) vol 1, 2396-2397 (para. 30-272).
296) Final award, ICC case 16247 (2010), ICC Disp Resol Bull 2016 no 1, 102.
297) Ibid., para. 85.
298) Ibid. Under some laws, where a contract provides for the need to satisfy conditions
to international arbitration (as is true of RB/17), this can cause uncertainty as to
when the limitation period begins. In a partial award, ICC case 19311 (2014), relating
to RB/99 and applying Romanian law it was held to begin only when the pre-arbitral
conditions had been satisfied and arbitration could commence whereas, in another
case, a final award, ICC case 17988 (2014), also involving a FIDIC contract and
applying Romanian law, it was held that its beginning was unaffected by the
existence of preconditions to arbitration. See Gustavo Scheffer da Silveira, Les
Modes de Règlement des Différends Dans Les Contrats Internationaux de Construction
(Bruylant, Brussels, 2019) 260-262 (para. 226). Under English law, in the case of
breach of contract, the limitation period begins to run from the date of breach. On
the other hand: ‘where a contract provides that an ascertainable or ascertained
amount is due [as in the case of a certified interim or final payment under RB/17],
the obligee’s [the Contractor’s] cause of action in respect of that amount accrues at
the point in time when the amount in question becomes due and payable’. Thus, in
the event of an Employer’s failure to pay the amount, the limitation period begins
at that time. Julian Bailey, Construction Law (3rd edn, London Publishing, UK, 2020),
vol 3, 2142-2144 (paras 26.42-26.44).
299) In common law countries, a court has generally no power to vary the terms of a
contract.
300) Apart from the doctrines of impracticability (in the United States) and frustration
(in England and Wales, and the United States). Paul Craig ‘Specific Powers of Public
Contractors’ and Paul Craig and Martin Trybus ‘England and Wales’ in Rozen
Noguellou and Ulrich Stelkens (eds), Comparative Law on Public Contracts (Bruylant,
Brussels, 2010) 173, 191-92, 339 and 353.
301) See the definition in Section 4.2.2 Public and Private Contracts above of Chapter II
Applicable Law.
302) Discussed in Section 4.2.2 Public and Private Contracts above of Chapter II
Applicable Law.
303) See Section 4.2.2 Public and Private Contracts above of Chapter II Applicable Law.
304) André de Laubadère and others, Traité des contrats administratifs (2nd edn, LGDJ,
Paris, 1983) vol I, 210 (para. 154) – 239-240 (para. 182) and Philippe Malinvaud (ed in
chief), Droit de la Construction (7th edn Dalloz Action, Paris, 2018) 1345 (para. 417.471)
to 1359 (para. 417.639).
305) Barry Nicholas, The French Law of Contract (2nd edn, OUP, Oxford, 1992) 27.
306) Ibid. According to French legal doctrine (known as privilège du préalable), members
of the public receiving orders or instructions from a public authority must conform
to them. Such orders or instructions are presumed to be legally valid so long as they
have not been withdrawn or abrogated by the administration or been suspended or
set aside by a court. If they are later set aside, the affected person’s remedy is in
damages. Council of State (CE) 27 February 1903, no 97.217, Olivier and Zimmermann S
1905.3.17.

47
© 2024 Kluwer Law International, a Wolters Kluwer Company. All rights reserved.
 307) According to Rozen Noguellou and Ulrich Stelkens (eds), Comparative Law on Public
Contracts (Bruylant, Brussels, 2010), the principle that the economic or financial
balance of an administrative contract should be maintained is accepted in, among
other countries, Belgium 412, Brazil 444, Colombia 531-33, France 691, Spain 580 and
Tunisia 989-990. This is also true in Argentina (Hector A Mairal, ‘Government
Contracts under Argentine Law: A Comparative Law Overview’ (2002) 26 Fordham
Int’l L J 1716, 1738 ), Egypt (Ali El Shalakany, ‘The Application of the FIDIC Civil
Engineering Conditions of Contract in a Civil Code System Country’ [1989] ICLR 266,
270) and, given the important influence of Egyptian law in the Arab Middle East,
probably in other Arab countries. On the other hand, as has been noted (partial
award, ICC case 20910 (2020) (unpublished), para. 714), a FIDIC contract includes
provisions that aim at rebalancing the financial conditions in the case of
extraordinary and/or unforeseen events, for example – in the case of RB/17 – in
Sub-Clause 4.12 [Unforeseeable Physical Conditions], Clause 13 [Variations and
Adjustments] and Sub-Clause 18.4 [Consequences of an Exceptional Event]. The
availability of these provisions may offset, though not necessarily exclude, the need
and right to maintain the economic balance of an administrative contract.
308) See Section 4.2.2 Public and Private Contracts above of Chapter II Applicable Law.
309) André de Laubadère and others, Traité des Contrats Administratifs (2nd edn, LGDJ,
Paris, 1984) vol II, 499 (para. 1276); Yves Gaudemet, Traité de droit administratif (15th
edn, LGDJ, Paris, 2014) vol II, 607 (para. 1102). These difficulties relate generally to
soil or climatic conditions. Philippe Malinvaud (ed in chief), Droit de la Construction
(7th edn, Dalloz Action, Paris, 2018) 1340 (para. 417.425). Interestingly, this doctrine is
echoed in Recital 109 of Directive 2014/24 EU of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement, which provides a definition of
unforeseeable circumstances which may justify modification of a procurement
contract.
310) André de Laubadère and others, Traité des Contrats Administratifs (2nd edn, LGDJ,
Paris, 1984) vol II, 513 (para. 1289); Yves Gaudemet, Traité de droit administratif (15th
edn, LGDJ, Issy-les-Moulineaux, 2014) vol II, 608 (para. 1105).
311) André de Laubadère and others, Traité des Contrats Administratifs (2nd edn, LGDJ,
Paris, 1984) vol II, 513 (para. 1289); Laurent Richer and François Lichère, Droit des
contrats administratifs (11th edn, LGDJ, Issy-les-Moulineaux, 2019) 264 (para. 551).
312) André de Laubadère and others, Traité des Contrats Administratifs (2nd edn, LGDJ,
Paris, 1984) vol II, 512 (para. 1288).
313) See the commentary on Sub-Clause 4.12 [Unforseeable Physical Conditions] in
Chapter IV Clause-by-Clause Commentary below.
314) André de Laubadère and others, Traité des Contrats Administratifs (2nd edn, LGDJ,
Paris, 1984) vol II, 503 (para. 1278); Marcel Waline, ‘L’évolution récente des rapports
de l’Etat avec ses cocontractants’ (Revue du Droit Public 1951) 5, 27.
315) André de Laubadère and others, Traité des Contrats Administratifs (2nd edn, LGDJ,
Paris, 1984) vol II, 504 (para. 1278); Yves Gaudemet, Traité de droit administratif (15th
edn, LGDJ, Issy-les-Moulineaux, 2014) vol II, 607 (para. 1103).
316) See Section 4.4.2 Lump Sum Contracts above of Chapter II Applicable Law.
317) André de Laubadère and others, Traité des Contrats Administratifs (2nd edn, LGDJ,
Paris, 1984) vol II, 510-11 (para. 1285-5); Yves Gaudemet, Traité de droit administratif
(15th edn, LGDJ, Paris, 2014) vol II, 608 (para. 1104); Laurent Richer and François
Lichère, Droit des Contrats Administratifs (11th edn, LGDJ, Issy-les-Moulineaux, 2019)
264-265 (para. 552).
318) Philippe Malinvaud (ed in chief), Droit de la Construction (7th edn, Dalloz Action,
Paris, 2018) 1341 (para. 417.428).
319) André de Laubadère and others, Traité des Contrats Administratifs (2nd edn, LGDJ,
Paris, 1984) vol II, 510-11 (para. 1285-5). For more details about upsetting the
economy of the contract, see Section 4.6.2, Hardship (Imprévision) below of Chapter
II Applicable Law.
320) Maurice André-Flamme, Traité Théorique et Pratique des Marchés Publics (Emile
Bruylant, Brussels, 1969) vol I, 58-59 (para. 24).
321) Hector A Mairal, ‘Government Contracts under Argentine Law: A Comparative Law
Overview’ (2002) 26 Fordham Int’l L J 1716, 1738-39.
322) Claudio Moraga Klenner in Rozen Noguellou and Ulrich Stelkens (eds), ‘Chile’ in
Comparative Law on Public Contracts (Bruylant, Brussels, 2010) 465, 478-479, para.
4.5.
323) Ali El Shalakany, ‘The Application of the FIDIC Civil Engineering Conditions of
Contract in a Civil Code System Country, A Comparison of Legal Concepts and
Solutions’ [1989] ICLR 266, 270-72.
324) Peruvian Legislative Decree no 1341 of 2017 which modified Public Procurement Law
no 30225 of 2014, art. 34.
325) Chilean Civil Code, art. 2003(2).
326) Colombian Civil Code, art. 2060(2).
327) As explained under Section 4.4.7.4 Hardship above, the new definition of hardship in
French private law (art. 1195 of the Civil Code) is to be distinguished from its
traditional definition in French public law, discussed in Section 4.6.2, which has had
a wide influence on both private and public laws in civil law countries.

48
© 2024 Kluwer Law International, a Wolters Kluwer Company. All rights reserved.