FIDIC Performance Certificate Template: A Sample You Can Adapt
Most people who search for this have already had the Taking-Over Certificate conversation, watched the Defects Notification Period run its course, and now want to know what actually closes the file. The Performance Certificate is that document — and under the FIDIC 1999 Red Book, it comes with a gap most Contractors never hear about until it costs them time: no deemed-issuance safety net. This guide gives you the request template, the exact Sub-Clause 11.9 timing, and the 2017 edition's fix for that gap.
Performance Certificate vs Taking-Over Certificate — What This Document Actually Closes Out
The Taking-Over Certificate and the Performance Certificate sit at opposite ends of the same period, and mixing them up is the single most common confusion in this part of the Contract. The Taking-Over Certificate, under Sub-Clause 10.1, marks the start of the Defects Notification Period — the Employer takes over the Works, but the Contractor's obligations are far from finished.
The Performance Certificate, under Sub-Clause 11.9, marks the end of it. It is issued once the Defects Notification Period has expired and the Contractor has supplied all Contractor's Documents, completed and tested the Works, and remedied every notified defect. Only the Performance Certificate is deemed to constitute acceptance of the Works — not the Taking-Over Certificate, and not the Contractor's own confirmation that the work is done.
Key Takeaway: The Taking-Over Certificate opens the Defects Notification Period. The Performance Certificate, under Sub-Clause 11.9, closes it. Only the Performance Certificate counts as acceptance of the Works — the Contractor's own sign-off does not.
When the Engineer Must Issue It
Under FIDIC 1999, the Engineer must issue the Performance Certificate within 28 days after the latest of two triggers: the expiry date of the Defects Notification Period, or the date the Contractor has actually finished everything the Contract requires — supplied all Contractor's Documents, completed and tested the Works, and remedied all defects — whichever of those two happens later.
That second trigger matters more than it looks. If the Defects Notification Period expires on paper but a defect is still outstanding, the 28-day clock has not started yet. The certificate only becomes due once both the calendar and the punch list agree that the work is actually finished.
There is also no "application" step here, unlike the Taking-Over Certificate. Sub-Clause 10.1 gives the Contractor the right to apply; Sub-Clause 11.9 does not. In theory the Engineer issues it unprompted once the conditions are met — in practice, a certificate nobody asked for is easy to leave in a queue. That is why a written request earns its place.
Key Takeaway: The 28-day clock runs from whichever is later — the Defects Notification Period expiry, or the date every defect is actually remedied. There is no Contractor "application" step under Sub-Clause 11.9, so nothing forces the Engineer to act unless the Contractor asks.
Performance Certificate Request Template — Copy and Adapt
Here is a skeleton for that request — not a contractual application like Sub-Clause 10.1 requires for Taking-Over, but a record the Engineer cannot later claim it never received. Replace everything in square brackets with your own facts, then delete the brackets.
Two things worth naming explicitly in that letter and nowhere else: the actual Defects Notification Period expiry date, and a plain confirmation that every remedy is done, not just most of them. Both are what let the Engineer test the request against the 28-day clock without having to chase you for the details first.
Key Takeaway: The request is not a formal application, but it should still name the exact Defects Notification Period expiry date and confirm every defect is remedied — the same two facts the Engineer needs to test the 28-day clock.
Worked Example: A Filled-In Request
Here is the same template filled in for a highway interchange nearing the end of its Defects Notification Period.
Notice what makes this testable at a glance: the Engineer can check the two named repairs against its own records in under a minute, rather than asking what "all outstanding items" means.
Key Takeaway: A request the Engineer can act on immediately names each remedied defect individually, with the date it was fixed — not a general assurance that "everything is done."
FIDIC 1999 vs 2017: The Deemed-Issuance Gap
This is the part most Contractors find out the hard way. Under the FIDIC 1999 Red Book, if the Engineer simply does not issue the Performance Certificate — no rejection, no response, just silence — there is no deemed-issuance mechanism to fall back on. Compare that to the Taking-Over Certificate, where 28 days of Engineer silence deems the certificate issued. Sub-Clause 11.9 has no equivalent. Silence just means the file stays open.
The FIDIC 2017 Second Edition fixes this. It adds a deemed-issuance provision to Sub-Clause 11.9: if the Engineer does not issue the Performance Certificate within 28 days after the Defects Notification Period is complete and the relevant documents have been supplied, the certificate is deemed issued — but that deemed certificate only takes effect after a further 28 days, roughly 56 days of Engineer silence in total. The 2017 edition also requires a copy to go to the Dispute Avoidance/Adjudication Board, and ties issuance to the Engineer's prior notice of no-objection to the as-built records — a precondition 1999 did not carry.
Practically, the written request matters more, not less, under FIDIC 1999. It cannot force a deemed certificate into existence, but it fixes the date the Engineer's obligation to act was triggered — the fact you need if a failure to issue ever has to be pursued as a dispute under Clause 20.
Key Takeaway: FIDIC 1999 has no deemed-issuance safety net for the Performance Certificate — silence just means the file stays open. The 2017 edition adds one, worth roughly 56 days of Engineer silence before the certificate deems itself issued, plus a DAAB copy requirement.
Common Mistakes That Delay a Performance Certificate
- Requesting it while a defect is still open. The 28-day clock does not start until every notified defect is remedied, not just when the calendar period expires.
- Assuming FIDIC 1999 behaves like Taking-Over. There is no deemed-issuance safety net here — treating Engineer silence as a formality is how requests sit unanswered for months.
- Vague confirmation instead of a named list. "All defects have been remedied" invites a follow-up question; naming each item with its fix date does not.
- Forgetting the period may have been extended. Under Sub-Clause 11.3, a late-surfacing defect can push the expiry date itself — requesting against the original date is then simply premature.
- Treating the certificate as a full release. Sub-Clause 11.10, Unfulfilled Obligations, keeps any obligation still unperformed at that date alive.
Key Takeaway: Most delayed Performance Certificates trace back to requesting too early, assuming a safety net that FIDIC 1999 does not provide, or a confirmation too vague for the Engineer to check quickly.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Performance Certificate the same as the Taking-Over Certificate?
No, they mark opposite ends of the Defects Notification Period. The Taking-Over Certificate starts the Defects Notification Period running, under Sub-Clause 10.1 — the Employer takes over the Works, but the Contractor still has to fix defects. The Performance Certificate, under Sub-Clause 11.9, closes it — it is issued once the Defects Notification Period has expired and the Contractor has remedied everything outstanding. Only the Performance Certificate is deemed to constitute acceptance of the Works.
What happens if the Engineer never issues the Performance Certificate under FIDIC 1999?
Unlike the Taking-Over Certificate, the 1999 Red Book gives no deemed-issuance mechanism for the Performance Certificate — silence from the Engineer does not automatically produce one. If a written request confirming the Defects Notification Period has expired and all defects are remedied gets no response, the Contractor's recourse is to press the Engineer directly and, if that fails, refer the Engineer's failure to issue the certificate as a dispute under Clause 20.
Does the Performance Certificate mean all of the Contractor's obligations end?
No. Sub-Clause 11.10, Unfulfilled Obligations, keeps alive any obligation that was still unperformed on the date the Performance Certificate was issued — for both parties. The certificate closes out the Defects Notification Period and constitutes acceptance of the Works; it is not a general release from every duty in the Contract.
Does the FIDIC 2017 edition fix the deemed-issuance gap?
Yes. The 2017 Second Edition adds a deemed-issuance provision to Sub-Clause 11.9: if the Engineer does not issue the Performance Certificate within 28 days after the Defects Notification Period is complete and the relevant documents have been supplied, the certificate is deemed issued — but that deemed certificate only takes effect after a further 28 days, so roughly 56 days of Engineer silence in total. The 2017 edition also requires a copy to go to the DAAB and ties issuance to the Engineer's notice of no-objection to the as-built records.
What if a defect appears right before the Defects Notification Period expires?
The Performance Certificate is not due while a defect remains unremedied. Under Sub-Clause 11.3, the Employer can require the Defects Notification Period to be extended where a defect or damage means the Works, a Section, or a major item of Plant cannot be used for its intended purpose — but notice of that extension has to be given before the original period expires, and the total extension is capped at two years.
Authoritative Sources
This guide reflects the FIDIC Conditions of Contract and established construction-law commentary. For the primary materials, see:
- FIDIC Conditions of Contract — the official contract suite published by the International Federation of Consulting Engineers, which sets out the Sub-Clause 11.9 Performance Certificate procedure referenced throughout this guide.
- 2017 Suite: Commentary on Clause 11 — Defects After Taking Over, Howard Kennedy — a clause-by-clause commentary covering the Sub-Clause 11.9 deemed-issuance provision added in the 2017 Second Edition.
About the Author
Muhammad M. Jiwani is a Project Director with 15 years' experience on major infrastructure and energy projects administered under FIDIC contracts. He writes from first-hand experience serving notices and managing contractual claims on live projects.