Abstract: The subject of the study is the legal conditions of mitigation (mitigation) of project risks, the bearing of which is assigned to the contractor by the terms of the EPC contract. One of the key features of the EPC contract, an agreement concluded for the implementation of an investment and construction project on a turnkey basis, is the maximum assignment to the contractor of risks associated with the failure to achieve the goals of the project. It is believed that the EPC contractor, as a professional and highly qualified representative of the construction industry, is able to manage project risks more effectively than the customer. The assignment of risk by the terms of the contract proforma to one of the parties implies the need to use organizational, economic and legal means to mitigate (mitigate) the burden of risk. This work is aimed at identifying civil legal means used by the contractor to mitigate the harmful effects of events and actions, the risk of which is assigned to him by the terms of the EPC contract and establishing the possibility of using these means in the conditions of the Russian legal system. Its achievement involves a comparative analysis of the model EPC contract - a model contract of the International Federation of Consulting Engineers for turnkey projects (FIDIC Silver Book 2017) and the norms of Russian civil legislation.
      The results of the study indicate that it is possible in principle to apply the conditions of the 2017 FIDIC Silver Book, which establish means of mitigating the contractor's burden of bearing risks, in the conditions of Russian legislation, taking into account the following exceptions:
(1) a security payment cannot be used as a means of mitigating the consequences of non-fulfillment by the contractor of a natural obligation;
(2) compensation for property losses cannot be applied in the event of an unlawful claim by the customer for a guarantee of performance of contractual obligations provided by the contractor.
The interrelated application of several civil legal means is aimed, ultimately, their application contributes to the achievement of the project goals, which is in the sphere of interests of both parties to the contract.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the similarities and differences between the contract forms developed by the international nongovernmental organizations for application in the sphere of investment construction activity (contracts terms for engineering, procurement, construction/ for turnkey projects, second edition of 2017, developed by the International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC), framework “turnkey” contract for large projects, first edition of 2007, developed by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)) and the norms of national civil legislation (Parts I and II of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) that regulate unilateral termination of construction contracts. The novelty of this research lies in conducting a comparative analysis of Russian legislation and contract forms developed by the international nongovernmental organizations. The examination of foreign experience in the sphere of legal regulation of termination of contract are based on analysis of the norms of contract law of the national legal systems of foreign countries. However, according to the foreign authors, contract law within the systems of both, general and continental law, was developing in seclusion, without substantial influence of one national system upon another. International influence upon the national contract law emerged relatively recently in the sphere of foreign economic activity. At the same time, the key factor for mutual enrichment of the national systems of contract law became the use of international contract forms, which contributed to the unification of contractual regulation of the relations of obligation in national jurisdictions. Their influence upon the development of contract law was far more substantial than even the development of international conventions with substantive law regulations.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the general terms of three standard contracts set by International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) in 2017 – conditions of contract for engineering, construction and installation works designed by the contractor; conditions of contract for engineering, construction and installation works designed by the employer; conditions of contract for “turnkey projects” and norms of the Federal Law “On contractual system in the sphere of procurement, works, and services for state and municipal needs; as well as bylaws in the area of public procurement and urban development, which regulate the establishment and change of conditions of construction contracts regarding the types and volume of works, their cost and deadline. The novelty of this research consists in the fact that the conditions of standard FIDIC contracts are analyzed in comparison with the current legislation of the Russian Federation on regulation of public procurement. The conducted comparison revealed discrepancies in the legal regimes of contractual relations emerging thereof. The law establishes rigid requirements to agreeing and setting conditions on the source, cost and completion time of works which impede differentiation of the level of their detailing in contract documentation, and thus the creation of a favorable environment for implementation of investment and construction projects. Excessively rigid rules of public procurement legislation pertaining to the changes of contract terms block the action of risk management procedures enshrined in the FIDIC standard contracts. As a result, the parties are not able to respond adequately and promptly to the impact of external and internal factors that affect project environment. A conclusion is made on impossibility of mutually agreed terms of application of FIDIC standard contracts and Russian legislation on public procurement without making substantial amendments to the content of standard contracts.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the general terms of three standard contracts set by International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) in 2017 – conditions of contract for engineering, construction and installation works designed by the contractor; conditions of contract for engineering, construction and installation works designed by the employer; conditions of contract for “turnkey projects” and norms of the Federal Law “On contractual system in the sphere of procurement, works, and services for state and municipal needs; as well as bylaws in the area of public procurement and urban development, which regulate the establishment and change of conditions of construction contracts regarding the types and volume of works, their cost and deadline. The novelty of this research consists in the fact that the conditions of standard FIDIC contracts are analyzed in comparison with the current legislation of the Russian Federation on regulation of public procurement. The conducted comparison revealed discrepancies in the legal regimes of contractual relations emerging thereof. The law establishes rigid requirements to agreeing and setting conditions on the source, cost and completion time of works which impede differentiation of the level of their detailing in contract documentation, and thus the creation of a favorable environment for implementation of investment and construction projects. Excessively rigid rules of public procurement legislation pertaining to the changes of contract terms block the action of risk management procedures enshrined in the FIDIC standard contracts. As a result, the parties are not able to respond adequately and promptly to the impact of external and internal factors that affect project environment. A conclusion is made on impossibility of mutually agreed terms of application of FIDIC standard contracts and Russian legislation on public procurement without making substantial amendments to the content of standard contracts.

Abstract: The object of this research is the relations on reformation of the Russian civil legislation. The subject of this research is the changes introduced into the Civil Code of the Russian Federation by the Federal Law No. 42-FZ of March 8, 2015. The author carefully examines the new rules of the Code, which were created under the influence of the common law doctrines; compares the content of “parent” doctrines with the new rules of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation; analyzes the mechanisms of infiltration of the common law doctrines into the Russian legal system, one of which consists the borrowing of the corresponding legal examples from entrepreneurial contracts, concluded between the Russian and foreign economic subjects. A conclusion is made that reformation of the Russian civil law is based on not only the Western European legal examples, which as claimed in the concept of development of civil legislation, are inherent to legislation of the countries of continental Europe, but also the common law doctrine that is “alien” to the Russian legal system. The author highlights that the common law doctrines are being borrowed directly from legislation of the countries from Anglo-Saxon legal family, as well as indirectly, from the practice of implementation of such doctrines that has been established within the Russian legal system.

Abstract: The object of this research is the relations on reformation of the Russian civil legislation. The subject of this research is the changes introduced into the Civil Code of the Russian Federation by the Federal Law No. 42-FZ of March 8, 2015. The author carefully examines the new rules of the Code, which were created under the influence of the common law doctrines; compares the content of “parent” doctrines with the new rules of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation; analyzes the mechanisms of infiltration of the common law doctrines into the Russian legal system, one of which consists the borrowing of the corresponding legal examples from entrepreneurial contracts, concluded between the Russian and foreign economic subjects. A conclusion is made that reformation of the Russian civil law is based on not only the Western European legal examples, which as claimed in the concept of development of civil legislation, are inherent to legislation of the countries of continental Europe, but also the common law doctrine that is “alien” to the Russian legal system. The author highlights that the common law doctrines are being borrowed directly from legislation of the countries from Anglo-Saxon legal family, as well as indirectly, from the practice of implementation of such doctrines that has been established within the Russian legal system.

Abstract:  
The object of this research is the organization and work of the International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) on creation and support of the professional standards in the area of engineering construction activity, including the establishment of norms and rules of professional ethics, principles of sustainable development, etc. The subject of this research is the work of the International Federation of Consulting Engineers on creation of standard contracts for performance of work and provision of services in the area of international investment construction projects, which represent generalization of business practices. The main conclusion consists in the fact that the work of FIDIC on systematization of business practices used in the field of investment construction activity is not a unification or harmonization of law, but rather represents a special, independent mechanism of converging national legal systems.
 

Abstract: The subject of this research is the terms of the Model Representative Agreement (further – Agreement) of the International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) of 2013, as well as the norms of Russian and foreign law that regulates the agency relations (norms of Chapter 52 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, and legal norms of England and Wales, which regulate agency relations). The agreement is meant to structure and regulate agency relations between the engineering, construction, and project management companies, as well as companies providing intermediary services, helping foreign countries enter the national market of corresponding services. This research represents a first analytical report on the content of the Model Representative Agreement of FIDIC of 2013. The author concludes that there is lack of principal juridical obstacles that would prevent application of the Agreement by Russian companies seeking to provide intermediary services to international engineering companies and project planners. In addition to that, the distribution of risk between the sides of the Agreement is on the side of the foreign companies, which needs to be considered in decision making on the use of this model of agreement.