TEO JENG YUConstruction Contracts: Five Areas That Can Become Disputes Later
Construction contracts are negotiated and signed at the point when a project relationship is at its most cooperative — timelines look achievable, budgets look sufficient, and both sides are focused on getting started. Disputes tend to surface much later, once delay, cost pressure or defects appear, and by then the contract's wording is often all that stands between a manageable disagreement and a costly claim.
1. Payment Mechanisms
Ambiguity in how progress claims are certified, valued and paid is one of the most common sources of dispute. Contracts that leave certification timelines, the basis for valuation, or the right to set off vague tend to generate disputes precisely when cash flow is tightest.
2. Variations and Instructions
Site-level changes are frequently agreed informally between project personnel without being recorded or priced in accordance with the contract's variation procedure. When a dispute later arises over whether extra work was instructed, or how it should be valued, the absence of a paper trail usually favours whichever party can construct the more convincing account.
3. Extension of Time and Delay
The contractual mechanism for claiming an extension of time — notice periods, particulars required, and the causes of delay that qualify — often determines whether a contractor is exposed to liquidated damages for a delay that, on the facts, may not have been entirely its fault.
4. Defects Liability and Handover
Provisions governing the defects liability period, the standard for making good defects, and the conditions for release of retention money are frequently the subject of dispute once a project nears completion and both sides are under pressure to close out the account.
5. Design Responsibility
Where design obligations are split between employer, contractor and consultants, unclear allocation of design risk — particularly on design-and-build contracts — is a recurring source of disputes over defects, since liability depends heavily on who was responsible for the relevant design decision.
What This Means in Practice
None of these areas are unusual or exotic — they appear in almost every standard form construction contract used in Malaysia. The difference between a project that avoids serious disputes and one that does not is usually not the form of contract used, but how carefully these five areas were negotiated, and how disciplined the parties were about following the contract's own procedures once the project was underway.
- Confirm certification and payment timelines are clear and workable for both sides
- Ensure variation instructions are recorded and priced in accordance with the contract
- Understand the notice and particulars required to claim an extension of time
- Clarify the defects liability period and retention release mechanics before signing
- Confirm design responsibility is clearly allocated, particularly on design-and-build projects
Our construction practice advises developers, contractors and consultants both at the contract drafting stage and once a dispute has arisen over any of these five areas.
A contract reviewed properly at the outset is consistently the cheapest way to avoid a dispute later.
This article provides general information about Malaysian law as a matter of public interest. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as a substitute for advice from qualified counsel on the specific facts of a matter. Laws and their interpretation change, and this article may not reflect the most current position.
← Back to Legal Insights