It is customary for parties involved in construction projects to use their own forms of tailored innovation agreement and, as a result, many different forms circulate. However, two standard forms were published in 2004, one by the LLSC Works Committee and the other by the CIC. The others are short and simple documents that have avoided unnecessary provisions, but they have different approaches to the consultant`s innovation. However, they deal with both the main problems of Blyth- Blyth v Carillion and the “no loss” argument (see practical mentions: innovation in construction projects and defence “deficit” in construction contracts). In the CLLS form guidelines, it is known as “a simple document adaptable to a wide range of different contexts and to the different forms of standard forms and tailored consulting agreements that exist on the market.” It is certainly a simple document with only 3 clauses. The first clause concerns innovation itself and the second and third with the jurisdiction or the rights of third parties. We recently published two new standard innovations, one from the City of London Law Society (CLLS) and the other from the Construction Industry Council (CIC). These standard forms were written largely in response to the decision of blyth – Blyth Ltd /Carillion Construction Ltd (2001) 79 Con LR 142 (Outer House, Court of Sessions). This is a good balancing act to protect the concerns of contractors and to find formulations that satisfy consultants. These conflicting views attempted to reconcile the two new forms and to take into account the themes highlighted in the Blyth-Blyth case. Both have been able to take different paths to address these issues. The CLLS form provides for an ab initio novation, i.e.
the contractor is treated as if he had participated in the appointment of the employer from the outset. The approach of the CIC form is not at all Novation, but a task (according to Blyth- Blyth), but with a guarantee from the advisor to the contractor with regard to pre-innovation services. However, contractors should exercise caution to the extent that, by literally interpreting the warranty for the contractor, the contractor could evade the liability provided by Blyth-Blyth if the damage suffered by the contractor is in part similar to the injury suffered by the employer in the event of a pre-renovation breach. Professor Sarah Lupton, Chair of the CIC Liability Panel, which led the development of the documents, said: “The Novation ab initio agreement is a completely new form and we hope that its introduction will help to normalise the rules across the sector and avoid the need for several ad hoc documents. A contract is concluded and a new contract is concluded in its place. In the construction industry, the term “Novation” is generally used for the same type of contract (i.e. the appointment of the councillor) with a change of party, i.e.: