For information and reference only – not to be submitted as your own work. This is a model-answer extract written to show structure, depth and referencing. It uses a hypothetical project. It is academic guidance, not legal advice, and must not be relied on for any real contract. Check every clause against the specimen RIAI form provided on Moodle, and follow the TUS rules on academic integrity and declared AI use.
This sample follows the LAWE 06101 Construction Law Assignment 1 brief (Technological University of the Shannon). For the full marking approach, read our guide on how to write the RIAI contract QS report.
1. Introduction and project context
This report examines the RIAI Articles of Agreement and Conditions of Contract, Yellow Form (2017 edition), which is used where a Bill of Quantities forms part of the contract (Cunningham, 2017). It identifies the conditions most relevant to the Quantity Surveyor (QS) and analyses four of them in depth: valuation of variations, interim payments and final account, retention and defects liability, and extensions of time with liquidated damages.
The example is hypothetical. It was chosen because a priced Bill of Quantities places the QS at the centre of every financial decision under the contract.
| Item | Hypothetical project details |
|---|---|
| Project | New three-storey primary care centre with surface car park |
| Location | Ennis, Co. Clare |
| Client (Employer) | Private healthcare property company (private sector, so the RIAI form rather than the public works contract) |
| Size and value | 2,400 m² gross internal floor area; tender sum €6.2 million excl. VAT (illustrative) |
| Procurement | Traditional, single-stage competitive tender; Bill of Quantities prepared under ARM4 |
| Contract | RIAI Yellow Form 2017 (with quantities), unamended |
| Programme | 60 weeks |
| QS role | Employer’s cost consultant, valuing work for the Architect’s certificates |
2. Completed contract – key Appendix entries
In your own submission, attach the completed specimen form as Appendix A. The entries that drive QS work are summarised below, with the default position noted where the 2017 form supplies one (Cunningham, 2017).
| Appendix item | Entry for this project | Why the QS cares |
|---|---|---|
| Designated Date | 14 days before tender return | Base date for price and legislative changes (Clauses 4 and 36) |
| Date for Completion | 60 weeks from possession | Start point for any delay and damages calculation |
| Liquidated and ascertained damages | €7,500 per week (illustrative) | Deducted in certificates if completion is late (Clause 29) |
| Defects Liability Period | 12 months | Controls release of the second half of retention |
| Interim Certificate Period | One calendar month | Sets the monthly valuation cycle (Clause 35) |
| Retention percentage / limit | 5% / limit 3% of Contract Sum | Cash held back in each certificate; form caps the percentage at 10% |
| Period of Final Measurement | 6 months | Time allowed to agree the final account |
The liquidated damages rate is illustrative. In practice it should be built up from the Employer’s likely losses, such as rent foregone and extra professional fees, following SCSI and RICS (2014).
3. Contract sections most relevant to the QS
| Clause (2017 Yellow) | Subject | QS involvement |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Architect’s Instructions | Every instruction may carry a cost; the QS logs and prices it |
| 3 | Drawings, specification and Bill of Quantities (ARM4; errors corrected) | Corrects measurement errors as variations |
| 4 and 36 | Legislative changes; wage and price variations | Calculates fluctuations from the Designated Date |
| 13 and 14 | Valuation of variations; omissions | Core QS duty: values additions and omissions |
| 15, 16, 17 | Subletting; nominated sub-contractors and suppliers | Checks payments to nominated firms are made |
| 18 and 19 | Provisional sums; prime cost sums | Adjusts allowances against actual cost in the final account |
| 21–24 | Indemnity and insurance | Checks the reinstatement value insured, including fees and VAT |
| 28–31 | Possession, damages, extensions, practical completion | Advises on the cost of delay and the damages deduction |
| 35 | Certificates and payments, retention, final account | Prepares interim valuations and the final account |
| 38 | Disputes (conciliation, arbitration) | Provides valuation evidence if a dispute arises |
One structural point stands out. The QS is not a party to the contract and has no certifying power of their own. The Architect certifies; the QS values. This split matters for every topic below.
Need help shaping your own clause table? Send us your LAWE 06101 brief and our specialists will walk you through the specimen form and your project.
4. Critical analysis of four topics
4.1 Valuation of variations (Clauses 2, 13 and 14)
Clause 13 sets an order of rules. Variations are valued by agreement first, then at Bill rates for similar work, then on rates derived from the Bill, then at fair market value, with daywork as the last resort (Cunningham, 2017). SCSI and RICS (2016) describe the same order and stress that daywork needs verified time and resource records.
On the Ennis project, assume the Architect instructs a change from a flat roof membrane to a green roof over 600 m². As QS, I would first ask whether any Bill item is “similar in character and conditions”. The waterproofing layer is; the growing medium and planting are not. So the waterproofing is valued at Bill rates, and the planting is priced on fair rates using supplier quotations. I would record each step in a variation account so the build-up can be checked later.
The weak point is timing. Valuations often drift to the final account when they are not agreed as the job progresses, and employers commonly amend the form to add stricter written-instruction procedures. A QS who values monthly, rather than leaving it to the end, reduces that risk for both sides.
4.2 Interim payments and final account (Clause 35)
The 2017 edition was revised to fit the Construction Contracts Act 2013. The contractor may request a certificate from the Architect, who certifies within five working days, and the Employer then pays within seven working days (LK Shields, 2017). The interim amount is the gross value of work properly executed and materials on site, less retention, any liquidated damages and previous certificates (Cunningham, 2017).
In practice, the QS walks the site with the contractor’s surveyor, measures progress against the Bill, and gives the Architect a valuation in time to meet the five-day window. If the certified sum differs from the claim, the basis of the difference should be explained. That is where QS records earn their keep.
The Act adds a second layer. Payment claim notices, a response window and statutory adjudication apply regardless of the contract terms, and parties cannot contract out (SCSI, 2017). Irish courts have shown they will enforce adjudicators’ decisions quickly: in Aakon Construction Services Ltd v Pure Fitout Associated Ltd [2021] IEHC 562 the High Court enforced the adjudicator’s decision. For the QS, a sloppy valuation is no longer a problem that can wait for the final account.
For the final account, the contractor submits documentation after practical completion, and the measurement should be completed within the Period of Final Measurement, six months by default in this example (Cunningham, 2017). The Final Certificate is conclusive on accounts except for fraud or latent defects, so the QS must be confident the account is complete before it issues.
4.3 Retention and defects liability (Clauses 31 and 35)
Retention is held at the Appendix percentage, which cannot exceed 10%, and is held by the Employer on trust for the contractor. Half is released on practical completion and the remainder on the Final Certificate (SCSI, 2016). A joint retention account (Clause 35(g)) or a retention bond (Clause 35(f)(1)) are alternatives.
On the Ennis project, 5% retention capped at 3% of the Contract Sum means the fund stops growing at €186,000 (3% of €6.2 million, illustrative). As QS I would show the retention running total on every valuation, so nobody is surprised by the cap or the release dates. The Defects Liability Period of 12 months begins the day after practical completion (Cunningham, 2017).
The critical issue is the trust. Retention protects the Employer against defects, but it is the contractor’s money. Where the trust and joint account provisions are deleted by amendment, the contractor’s protection weakens if the Employer becomes insolvent. A QS advising a private client should explain that trade-off, rather than simply recommending the deletion.
4.4 Extensions of time and liquidated damages (Clauses 28–30)
Clause 30 allows extensions for listed events, including force majeure, exceptionally inclement weather, Architect’s instructions and late information. The contractor must notify the Architect promptly and use best endeavours to prevent delay (Cunningham, 2017). If completion is late, Clause 29 lets the Employer recover the liquidated and ascertained damages stated in the Appendix, normally after the Architect certifies that the works ought to have been completed (SCSI and RICS, 2014).
The QS does not decide extensions; the Architect does. But the QS prices the consequences, both the damages deducted and any loss and expense claimed by the contractor. Suppose a two-week delay from late structural information on the Ennis job. If the Architect grants two weeks, the €15,000 damages exposure (2 × €7,500, illustrative) disappears and the contractor may claim prolongation costs instead. The QS needs programme and resource records to test that claim.
The rate itself must be defensible. Irish law has continued to apply the “genuine pre-estimate of loss” test to penalty clauses, and the courts have not simply adopted the UK’s broader legitimate-interest approach (Sheehan v Breccia [2018] IECA 286). A QS who helps set the Appendix rate should therefore keep the calculation on file.
5. Legal and professional reflection
Three tensions came through in this analysis. First, the QS is appointed by the Employer but is expected to value fairly; the contractor relies on that fairness, yet the QS has no independent contractual status under the RIAI form. Second, the Construction Contracts Act 2013 runs alongside the contract, so the QS must work to two clocks at once: the contract’s working-day periods and the Act’s own notice and response periods. Third, the RIAI published a revised 2025 contract that reduces the conditions from 38 clauses to 12 and introduces time bars for contractor claims that are not notified in time (Wallace, 2025; William Fry, 2025). A graduate QS will meet both editions on live projects for years.
Your own reflection section must come from your own experience: what was hardest to interpret on the specimen form, and what you would do differently in practice.
6. Presentation outline (Task 2)
| Slide | Content | Time |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Project snapshot: type, size, client, location, contract | 40 s |
| 2 | Clause map: the conditions that put the QS to work | 60 s |
| 3 | Why these four topics: the money chain from variation to final account | 60 s |
| 4 | One worked example: the green-roof variation valued under Clause 13 | 70 s |
| 5 | Challenges and what I learned (the two clocks; 2017 v 2025) | 70 s |
Want a model answer built around your own project? Submit your assignment details and we will provide guidance and reference material; you write and submit your own work.
Related pages
- ARCT40090 procurement and contracts assignment example
- Construction economics assignment help
- Law assignment help
About the expert
Kelsey Ann holds an LLM in Business Law and has 1,945 completed orders on Ireland Assignment Help. Academic guidance only; not legal advice. Figures and project details are hypothetical.
References
Aakon Construction Services Ltd v Pure Fitout Associated Ltd [2021] IEHC 562. Available at: https://www2.courts.ie/view/judgments/f277746d-e918-467b-9aa4-f0d414a8406f/5a08540d-1da1-4d97-ac3c-e9d155b81f94/2021_IEHC_562.pdf/pdf (Accessed: 20 October 2026).
Cunningham, T. (2017) The RIAI Standard Form of Contract – 2017 Version: An Overview. Dublin: Dublin Institute of Technology. Available at: https://arrow.tudublin.ie/beschreoth/74/ (Accessed: 20 October 2026).
LK Shields (2017) Construction contracts update: new 2017 editions of the RIAI contracts, 30 November. Available at: https://lkshields.ie/news-insights/publication/construction-contracts-update-new-2017-editions-of-the-riai-contracts (Accessed: 20 October 2026).
SCSI (2016) Retention: guidance note. 1st edn. Dublin: Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland. Available at: https://scsi.ie/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/SCSI-Retention-Guidance-Note-Inside-2.pdf (Accessed: 20 October 2026).
SCSI (2017) Quantity surveyors guide to the Construction Contracts Act. Dublin: Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland. Available at: https://scsi.ie/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Quantity-Surveyors-Guide-to-the-Construction-Contracts-Act.pdf (Accessed: 20 October 2026).
SCSI and RICS (2014) Damages for delay to completion: guidance note. 1st edn. Dublin: Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland. Available at: https://scsi.ie/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/cost_to_competion_.pdf (Accessed: 20 October 2026).
SCSI and RICS (2016) Valuing change: guidance note. 1st edn. Dublin: Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland. Available at: https://scsi.ie/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/SCSI-Valuing-Change-Guidance-Note-Inside-2-1.pdf (Accessed: 20 October 2026).
Sheehan v Breccia [2018] IECA 286.
Wallace, G. (2025) ‘The RIAI 2025 construction contracts have arrived’, Mondaq, 13 November. Available at: https://www.mondaq.com/ireland/construction-planning/1704342/the-riai-2025-construction-contracts-have-arrived (Accessed: 20 October 2026).
William Fry (2025) Changing times: construction contract updated by RIAI, 29 October. Available at: https://www.williamfry.com/knowledge/changing-times-construction-contract-updated-by-riai/ (Accessed: 20 October 2026).
