In recent months, the world has changed dramatically. An
exceptional few are working remotely or in controlled environments,
while many are not. Campaigns, events, construction, and all other
manner of projects have been scaled down or otherwise put on hold.
In
the immediate wake of the declaration of a pandemic by the WHO in
relation to the Covid-19 virus, many business owners made swift
decisions about how to protect their premises and staff, and how best to
assist their employees to deal with the crisis. Businesses with ongoing
infrastructure contracts also had to make a different type of decision –
as to whether or not their projects could and should proceed, and
whether or not to claim relief from the consequences of the pandemic.
Overnight, project developers and contractors became experts on
contractual and equitable relief, and all lawyers could talk about was
‘force majeure’ and ‘frustration’.
Now,
some months down the track, these same parties are looking at their
projects, whether suspended or otherwise, and wondering, what next? We
speculate daily about when we may return to ‘business as usual’ and what
it could look like – but the short answer is that nobody knows.
Instead
of hypothesising about the unknown, project parties would be better
placed planning for the return to work and making sure they are well
prepared for issues that they are likely to face. Below are a few issues
that construction, energy and infrastructure projects are likely to
face, and guidance on how best to forward-manage these headaches.
The
first is authorisation. Key to any infrastructure project is the
obligation to obtain the required authorisations and keep these current.
Where a project runs smoothly, this is rarely a concern. However, a
significant period of suspension followed by a remobilisation period
could see a number of project authorisations lapsing if not renewed
within time.
Project parties should review the validity of each of their
authorisations and ensure they diarise the scheduled expiry. Keep in
mind that authorisations which ‘automatically expire’ on a certain date
should not be allowed to lapse – an extension should be sought well in
advance. Equally, where authorisations have to be obtained in person (or
from a rural authority), parties should allow adequate time to
facilitate and complete this process.
The next issue is
interdependencies. Beyond their immediate contractual relations,
parties should consider whether completion of their project is dependent
on other actions being taken by a third party. If this is the case,
will those parties be able to meet those obligations once the project is
back on track? If, for example, a power project requires connection to
the grid or certification by a government entity, it would be prudent to
check whether the transmission or distribution company has been
adversely impacted. Does it have employees available to assist with or
witness commissioning – and is there a guarantee that they will be
available to assist with this process within the timelines scheduled?
Parties
to a concession agreement should also take the time to understand when
the offtaker will become obliged to pay. With most economies in a
serious slow-down, the demand for certain types of infrastructure has
slowed – in the case of power for example, there could be less uptake
for electricity by consumers. In the case of roads, people are
travelling less. It would not be unthinkable for an offtaker who has
committed to making regular payments to project developers upon
completion of such infrastructure, to want to avoid or delay this
obligation. Parties to such projects should make sure they understand
the payment obligations and have an open and honest dialogue about
planned completion and the corresponding obligation to pay. Where
projects are financed, developers should be aware of how a delay in
payment could impact their obligations to repay the loan facility.
Third
is change in law and tax. We have seen a spate of legislation
introduced throughout the region which attempts to insulate the general
population from the immediate impact of the pandemic. In some cases,
these changes seem not to take into account the long term consequences
for the business owners who carry the burden of compliance.
When
projects resume, it will be critical to have mitigated the costs of
compliance with these new laws, and to be clear on who ultimately pays
for such compliance. Parties should therefore consider what costs will
be incurred and how any new health and safety requirements will impact
the bottom line, and timeline. Parties should review their contracts for
‘Change in Law’ or ‘Change in Tax’ provisions to ensure they understand
their exposure and how much (if any) of this cost can be passed on.
Finally,
the practical considerations – don’t rush back. Beyond legal and
technical issues, it is important to make a complete assessment of what a
project needs in order to get back on track. It is not just about when a
curfew is lifted, or flights reopen – consider backlogs for key
suppliers and the need for imported equipment to clear customs, as well
as other basic issues such as whether workers can actually get to site
(they may still be confined geographically, or the condition of the road
could have deteriorated).
No comments :
Post a Comment