The Fedration Internationale des Ingenieurs-Conseils (FIDIC) 2017–2022 and NEC4 Engineering and Construction Conditions introduced some significant amendments to the dispute resolution provisions in both Conditions of Contract. Both contract suites now have provisions on dispute boards. This article critically explores the extent and style of adoption of the dispute board concept by the two influential contract giants, gaps and likely implications for their respective dispute handling strategies. The pathways of adoption of the concept are surprisingly similar but the infrastructure for delivery of dispute board services differ. Both contracts will benefit from additional reforms to introduce early dispute board involvement and a post-performance review or feedback system.

A previous review of the NEC3 dispute resolution framework shows that dispute options provided by the New Engineering Contract (NEC) do not align with its own relational and cooperative philosophy.1 The 1999 FIDIC Rainbow suite of contract forms2 have a range of dispute resolution mechanisms, but these are not expressly anchored in a driving philosophy.3 Drafters of the recent FIDIC and NEC contract suites have introduced some significant amendments to the dispute resolution provisions in the respective Conditions of Contract. Both contract suites have dispute board provisions. This move follows a growing global trend of the use of dispute boards on construction and engineering projects. Given the status of these