<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>CMGuide</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cmguide.com.au/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.cmguide.com.au</link>
	<description>Construction Claims &#38; CM Consultants</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2026 05:13:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>

 
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">4789268</site>	<item>
		<title>FIDIC Payment Provisions: The IPC Process, Withholding, Set-Off, and Late Payment Interest</title>
		<link>https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6820?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=fidic-payment-provisions-the-ipc-process-withholding-set-off-and-late-payment-interest</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CMGuide]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2026 05:13:41 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Construction Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Construction Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract Administration]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6820</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>The FIDIC payment mechanism — spanning the Interim Payment Certificate process, withholding, set-off, and late payment interest — is among the most technically demanding and frequently disputed aspects of contract administration. This article examines how the payment machinery operates under both the 1999 and 2017 Red Books, identifies the key changes introduced in 2017, and provides practical guidance for contractors, employers, and engineers.</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6820">FIDIC Payment Provisions: The IPC Process, Withholding, Set-Off, and Late Payment Interest</a> first appeared on <a href="https://www.cmguide.com.au">CMGuide</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">6820</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Unforeseeable Ground Conditions Under FIDIC Sub-Clause 4.12: The Objective Test and What Contractors Must Prove</title>
		<link>https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6818?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=unforeseeable-ground-conditions-under-fidic-sub-clause-4-12-the-objective-test-and-what-contractors-must-prove</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CMGuide]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jun 2026 18:49:04 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Construction Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Construction Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract Administration]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6818</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Ground conditions are one of the biggest sources of construction claims. FIDIC Sub-Clause 4.12 allocates that risk through an objective unforeseeability test — but what exactly must a contractor prove, and what has the 2017 edition changed?</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6818">Unforeseeable Ground Conditions Under FIDIC Sub-Clause 4.12: The Objective Test and What Contractors Must Prove</a> first appeared on <a href="https://www.cmguide.com.au">CMGuide</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">6818</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The FIDIC 2017 Claims Mechanism: Has the Time-Bar Beast Been Tamed?</title>
		<link>https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6816?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-fidic-2017-claims-mechanism-has-the-time-bar-beast-been-tamed</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CMGuide]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jun 2026 18:26:53 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Construction Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Construction Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract Administration]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6816</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>The 28-day notice time-bar under FIDIC Clause 20 has extinguished countless meritorious claims. Did the 2017 suite reform it, or just restate it more clearly? A practitioner-focused analysis of what actually changed — and what remains unforgiving.</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6816">The FIDIC 2017 Claims Mechanism: Has the Time-Bar Beast Been Tamed?</a> first appeared on <a href="https://www.cmguide.com.au">CMGuide</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">6816</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reflecting on the Second Edition of International Contractual and Statutory Adjudication</title>
		<link>https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6808?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=reflecting-on-the-second-edition-of-international-contractual-and-statutory-adjudication</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CMGuide]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2026 19:47:44 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Construction Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Construction Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security of Payment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Statutory Adjudication]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cmguide.com.au/?p=6808</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By Dr Samer Skaik Over the past decade, my work in construction law and adjudication has consistently reinforced one reality: adjudication has become a cornerstone of modern dispute resolution across the global construction industry. It has therefore been a privilege to contribute to the Second Edition of International Contractual and Statutory Adjudication, as an Assistant [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6808">Reflecting on the Second Edition of International Contractual and Statutory Adjudication</a> first appeared on <a href="https://www.cmguide.com.au">CMGuide</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">6808</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Decoding Concurrent Delay: The SCL Protocol and Employer Responsibility</title>
		<link>https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6742?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=decoding-concurrent-delay-the-scl-protocol-and-employer-responsibility</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CMGuide]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2025 10:47:19 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Construction Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Construction Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Project Management]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cmguide.com.au/?p=6742</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Delays in construction and infrastructure projects are almost an inevitability. But what happens when multiple delays hit at once, and some are the client&#8217;s fault while others lie with the contractor? This is the tricky terrain of concurrent delay, a concept that can lead to significant disputes over extensions of time and financial compensation. The [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6742">Decoding Concurrent Delay: The SCL Protocol and Employer Responsibility</a> first appeared on <a href="https://www.cmguide.com.au">CMGuide</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">6742</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Navigating the Tensions: A Guide to Mediation in Construction Disputes</title>
		<link>https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6740?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=navigating-the-tensions-a-guide-to-mediation-in-construction-disputes</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CMGuide]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2025 14:39:07 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Construction Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract Administration]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cmguide.com.au/?p=6740</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Construction projects are inherently complex, often fraught with variables that can lead to disagreements, claims, and disputes. When a conflict arises, it can be costly in terms of time, money, and professional relationships. While a traditional approach might be to head straight to litigation, it is often more effective to leverage alternative dispute resolution (ADR) [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6740">Navigating the Tensions: A Guide to Mediation in Construction Disputes</a> first appeared on <a href="https://www.cmguide.com.au">CMGuide</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">6740</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Crucial Choice: One or Three Decision Makers in Construction Disputes</title>
		<link>https://www.cmguide.com.au/archives/6725?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-crucial-choice-one-or-three-decision-makers-in-construction-disputes</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CMGuide]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2025 13:33:02 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Construction Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract Administration]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cmguide.com.au/?p=6725</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[