The increase in construction contracts in recent decades has increased the necessity of creating dispute resolution methods in this field that are appropriate to the requirements of this type of contract. Different methods for resolving disputes are considered in construction contracts. The use of dispute resolution methods due to its non-judicial approach can help to resolve disputes quickly and reduce costs. The nature of construction contracts requires that disputes be resolved quickly and sometimes at the site of the project. In this research, while examining the terms of dispute resolution in Article 53 of the general terms of the contract and comparing it with the terms of dispute resolution in the FIDIC contract, the shortcomings and loopholes in Article 53 of the general terms of the contract will be presented, and suggestions will be made to amend this article.

Most major construction projects in the world are based on standard contract conditions for international projects issued by the Fé dé ration Internationale des Ingé nieurs-Conseils (FIDIC, or International Federation of Consulting Engineers), which are based on concept law rooted in the common law system. Thus, the stakeholders involved in construction projects in the World need to understand the interpretation of FIDIC provisions against a background of civil law. This literature study will explore the identification of risks that occur in international projects using FIDIC contracts. A systematic review and detailed content analysis of 30 articles selected from respected academics and relevant journals published over the past three decades was carried out. The findings of risk identification are divided into 5 namely (1) Planning and Design, (2) Construction, (3) Operations & Maintenance, (4) Political Environment and (5) Social Economic. This study trying to identify, investigate, and classify the strongest factors that are considered to influence delays in construction projects. From the results of grouping identification, it is found that the greatest risk in FIDIC construction contracts is when the construction work is caused due to the complexity of the problems at the time of the construction, whether the dispute, payment or claims of work results. Recommendations from the authors would be good for the relevant stakeholders the project uses the FIDIC contract to further study the contents of the contract to help reduce or at least minimize the risk of project delays, especially during construction.

Severe fluctuations in prices can cause a distortion of the balance of considerations, particularly in long-term contracts, such as construction contracts. One way to reasonably reduce the risk of unforeseen costs due to price fluctuations in raw materials and manpower is to design a contract price adjustment system. Since Iranian law is substantially influenced by the state economy, large-scale economic activities are carried out directly by the state. In general contracts, based on Article 23 of the Program and Budget Act, the general terms of contracts are the basis for drafting governmental contracts of which the standard model is FIDIC contracts. In general contracts in Iran, the government, as a regulatory body, has a direct involvement in the implementation of this type of contracts. Hence, the analysis of the nature and basis of moderation in the general terms of contract is subject to controversy. This article strives to examine the nature and basis of the moderation clause in general terms of the contract and to compare it with FIDIC contracts.

In recent decades, the International Union of Consulting Engineers (known as "FIDIC") has tried to resolve disputes amicably before referring them to management arbitration by predicting different dispute resolution methods in standard contracts. FIDIC international construction sample contracts, since they have parties with different nationalities, should always be managed effectively so as not to be distrusted by foreign employers and contractors. Therefore, in such contracts, multi-layered dispute resolution and a combination of alternative methods of longitudinal dispute resolution are foreseen. In this research, which was compiled using descriptive and analytical method and citing reliable foreign and domestic sources, the findings of the discussion showed that since 1999, FIDIC replaced the dispute resolution role of "Consulting Engineer" with "Dispute Resolution Board" (Sometimes "Dispute Avoidance Board") taking into account the type, quality and economic price of construction projects, as well as the agreement of the parties to the contracts, has tried to provide different and multi-layered models, firstly: to prevent disputes (preventive role) and secondly: disputes manage it in the development stage with special arrangements.

Time is as a fundamental element in contracting agreements, particularly given the complexity and technical nature of such contracts. Consequently, dispute resolution methods in this field must be both expeditious and highly specialized. Additionally, since unresolved disputes can lead to contract termination or compromise project quality, maintaining both parties' willingness to continue the contract is paramount. It is essential to adopt dispute resolution mechanisms that protect the interests of both parties, fostering win-win outcomes.The International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC), drawing on its extensive experience, has incorporated the Dispute Adjudication Board (DAB) alongside preventive dispute resolution measures into its standard contract templates. The DAB, a hybrid mechanism combining elements of mediation and expert determination, offers a unique approach to dispute resolution. While this model is widely implemented in international contracts, its application in Iran remains limited. The Contractual Dispute Board of the Ministry of Petroleum represents the closest equivalent within the Iranian legal framework.This article explores the structure and functioning of the FIDIC Dispute Adjudication Board, compares it with existing dispute resolution mechanisms in Iran, and examines its potential for broader application in the Iranian contracting sector.

Settlement of disputes in service contracts with regard to the economic importance of oil industry projects and the need for speed in settlement of disputes as well as the specialty of reviewing of dispute and reducing the costs of proceedings has particular importance for countries over the last few decades. FIDIC provides a unit model in service contract and launches a new institution called the “ Dispute Board” in 1999 to resolve disputes. Iran’ s Oil Ministry in four periods announced several instructions for resolving of disputes. The results of the comparative review of these instructions at the FIDIC Organization and the Petroleum Ministry indicates disadvantages such as the absence of Dispute Board members over the life of the project in the site, not mentioning specific dates for each process and also, failure to play the role of deterring these boards in the emergence of differences between the parties. the scope of this research is on general terms of contract in FIDIC for the settlement of disputes between contracting parties and Iranian models bugs. It should be noted that the present study has used a descriptive-analytical method.

Increasing comprehensive understanding of EPC contracts, the most widely-used contract model in the oil and gas industry, and conducting a detailed review of the method of contractual distribution of responsibilities and risks among the parties involved, are crucial for successful implementation of mentioned contracts. Therefore, this article explains the most important legal concepts in EPC contracts and analyzes the method of distributing legal-contractual risks and responsibilities in these contracts. This analysis is based on internal EPC documents published for industrial works, compared to the FIDIC EPC/Turnkey model contract. we identify points of distinction, analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the mentioned documents and provided appropriate suggestions to eliminate deficiencies and modify items that need revision.This article answers the question of how successful internal EPC documents have been in designing an equitable and efficient contractual distribution of risks and responsibilities between the employer and contractor. A comparative study of the method of distribution of legal-contractual risks in the EPC documents of the oil industry and industrial EPC (5490 journal) compared to FIDIC EPC/Turnkey confirms a more equitable distribution of risks in the EPC document of the oil industry than the unilateral transfer of risks to the contractor in 5490 journal, specially by setting deadlines and specific penalties for the timely fulfillment of obligations by the employer. However, the efficient distribution of legal-contractual risks between the contracting parties, as the approach adopted in FIDIC, still needs revision regarding the method of risks transferring in this document. This article provides solutions for this purpose, such as creating a correspondence between the contracting parties’ rights in contract termination, predicting the payment of damages resulting from the unilateral contract termination by the employer, as well as the damages caused to the contractor as a result of the termination of the contract by the contractor due to the employer’s negligence, modifying the final dispute resolution method and the method of appointing members of dispute resolution boards,  balancing the compensation liability of Third party damages, Providing payment of damages in all cases of employer’s delay in timely fulfilling of his obligations and Predicting the right of work suspension by the contractor to ensure timely payment of invoices.

evaluating the method of contractual distribution of project implementation responsibilities and risks between the parties to the EPC contracts as one of the most important methods of risk management, commands abundant importance. In this paper, by examining the specific EPC document of the oil industry and comparing it with the industrial EPC document (5490 journal) as well as the FIDIC EPC turnkey, with the aim of evaluating the method of contractual distribution of the technical, engineering, and operational risks in these documents, We will answer the question of to what extent the compilation of the specific EPC document of the oil industry in establishing a balance between benefits and the responsibilities of the parties to the contract have been successful? The results of the comparative study confirm that although the completion of contractual vacancies and revision in 5490 journal causes more efficient and equitable contractual distribution of risks between employer and the contractor in the specific EPC document of the oil industry toward the unilateral transfer of technical, engineering and operational risks to the contractor in 5490 journal, but balancing the technical, engineering and operational risks between the employer and the contractor, like the approach adopted in FIDIC, still needs revision about method of contractual transfer of risks among contracting parties in this document.

The right of suspension entitles a contracting party to suspend the performance accordingto rules of law, contractual terms or as a result of force majeure. The same right may also be established as withholding the performance, according to the provisions of civil law in connection with contract of sale or other exchange contracts, until such time as the other party shows willingness to perform. Both rights are based on reciprocity of the contractual obligations and interconnection of the reciprocal obligations. The right of suspension of the performance has been recognized under the provision of the standard general conditions of contracting, as well as under some of Iranian multinational contracts. The suspension as a result of force majeure although is not expressly been envisaged under Iranian law 'of contracts, it is recognized by necessary implication of contract law rules. The right of withholding which is recognized under Iranian civil and commercial laws is mainly related to contracts with single performance, while the right of suspension is recognized in contracts that need to be performed during a gradual process. At the same time the legal standing of suspension was not clearly discussed under Islamic law literature but it had certainly been contemplated by Islamic law jurists in relevant situations. On the contrary the right of withholding has been expressly discussed. There are similarities between suspension provisions under FIDIC and the general contracting form. However, the differences are regarding the fact that under general conditions of contracting the right of suspension is mainly a unilateral right while under FIDIC form of the terms and conditions of exercising the right, Its duration, extension and damages arising out of suspension are contractually provided for. Consequently except for the difference in terms of contracts with one time performance or gradual performance, the legal nature of withholding and suspension is the same and one may apply the reasons and legal basis of withholding to suspension, admitting the fact that suspension is an independent legal concept.

To insure the implementation of contractual obligations, guarantees is obtained from promisor in contracts. With reference to the general conditions of guarantees, nature and recording of these guarantees have not been stipulated in civil law and FIDIC contracts. In civil law and on the analysis of the substantive guarantees, predominant views presented are: contract guarantee, umbrella clause, article 10 of civil code and collateral guarantee. The most appropriate view is collateral guarantee that offers a comprehensive analysis of all guarantees. This guarantee is real and personal. Most common among guarantees in FIDIC contracts is type of personal security, too, that is almost similar with personal collateral guarantee in civil law. Recording of guarantee is the most important problem but because of ambiguity in the nature of guarantee, the frequency difference is made between contractor and employer. A conditional guarantee create obligations of an accessory nature, where the liability of the guarantor arises upon an established default by the contractor and under on-demand guarantee do not stipulate any condition for payment and when contractor after the on-demand guarantee unfairly has been called, the only remedy available to him would be to pursue the matter in litigation.