In-House Brief Supplement: Price Fluctuation Under Qatari Law Compared

Professor Indrawansa Samaratunga

Steven Hunt of C&IDS

13 October 2026

This Supplement should be read with In-House Brief: Price Fluctuation Under the New UAE Civil Code: What Changed and What Did Not, referred to below as the main paper.

This supplement sets out briefly how the position in Qatar compares with the new UAE Code. Qatar has not reformed its Civil Code, which has been in force since 2004.¹ Its approach to price fluctuation is closer to the old UAE Code than to the new one. There is one important difference, and on one point it gives a contractor a firmer footing than the UAE now does.

The lump sum rule

Article 700 of the Qatari Civil Code contains the lump sum rule. Increases in the prices of raw materials, workers’ wages and other costs do not entitle a lump sum contractor to an increase in the price.² In substance this is the same rule as Article 829(1) of the new UAE Code, and it has the same “even if prices rise” character that has prompted the debate in the UAE.

The answer to that debate is, in our view, the same in Qatar. Article 700 is a default rule. It does not say that an agreement to the contrary is void, and price adjustment clauses agreed at the outset are recognised as effective.² In practice they are uncommon in Qatar, and where they are used they are often poorly drafted. Commentators have pointed to clauses tied to foreign price indices, and to adjustment formulae that return only a fraction of the actual increase.² The drafting point in the main paper matters as much in Doha as in Dubai.

The key difference: no construction-specific hardship provision

Qatar has no equivalent of Article 829(3). Article 700 does not give the court its own power to restore the contractual balance of a construction contract. Instead, it applies “without prejudice to” Article 171(2), the general hardship provision.² The lump sum contractor’s route to relief for exceptional price increases is therefore the general route, and only that route.

Article 171(2) is the counterpart of UAE Article 224 (and of old Article 249). It applies where exceptional and unforeseeable events of a general nature make performance onerous, though not impossible, so that the obligor is threatened with grave loss. The court or tribunal may then reduce the onerous obligation to a reasonable level, after balancing the interests of the parties.³,⁴ The threshold is high. The events must be rare and general, and commentary gives wars, sudden strikes, official price fixing and excessive price movements as examples.⁵

Three consequences follow.

• The relief cannot be excluded. Article 171(2) is mandatory, and the parties cannot contract out of it.³,⁴ In the UAE, whether Article 829(3) can be excluded is the main point of disagreement. In Qatar the question does not arise, because the only hardship route available is one that the contract cannot remove.

• The remedies are narrower. The power is to reduce the obligation to a reasonable level. There is no express menu of more time, more money or rescission of the kind found in Article 829(3), and no express power of rescission of the kind Article 224 now contains. Commentators suggest that the adjustment may take the form of more time,⁵ and that it operates while the contract continues, not by ending it.⁴

• Re-measured contracts are in the same position. Because the route is the general provision, it is available whether the contract is lump sum or re-measured. The anomaly identified in the main paper, under which a re-measured contractor in the UAE may be worse protected than its lump sum counterpart, does not arise in Qatar.

Other points

Transition. There is no transitional question. Qatari contracts old and new are governed by the same Code.

The courts’ approach. The Court of Cassation, considering COVID-19, held that the same event may be force majeure, an exceptional circumstance or an ordinary event, depending on the contract and its effect on the parties’ obligations.⁴ A hardship claim in Qatar is therefore fact-specific and depends heavily on the evidence.

Foreseeability. The same date applies. A Qatari contract signed after the conflict began on 28 February 2026 will face the argument that the disruption should have been priced.

Government contracts. We have not found a statutory price adjustment mechanism in Qatar’s Tenders and Auctions Law (Law No. 24 of 2015, as amended by Law No. 17 of 2024) comparable to the Saudi procurement regime.⁶ Public sector contractors should look to the contract terms and to Article 171(2).

What this means in practice

In Qatar, as in the UAE, a contractor who wants protection against rising costs needs an express clause, and that clause needs to be drafted with care: the right indices, a formula that reflects the real cost mix, and clear words that it applies notwithstanding Article 700. An employer cannot use a “fixed price, no escalation” clause to shut out Article 171(2), and should not assume that it has. A contractor relying on Article 171(2) should give prompt notice, keep performing, and keep detailed records of the cost movement, because the court’s remedy depends on showing what is “reasonable” against the original bargain.

How to obtain the Practice Note

The companion "Practice Note: Price Fluctuation Under the Qatari Civil Code" sets out the practical steps for contractors and subcontractors working under contracts governed by Qatari law, before contract, during the works and when a claim arises. It is available to Steven's LinkedIn connections. If you are already connected with him, you will find it posted on his profile. If you are not, send him a connection request through his LinkedIn profile and you will secure access to the Note.

C&IDS places fractional in-house construction counsel with contractors, developers and consultants across the GCC, Africa and the UK. If you would like to discuss how a placed counsel could support your team on price adjustment and hardship provisions in live projects or tenders in Qatar, please get in touch at admin@candids.legal.

For more insights and content, subscribe to In-House Brief.

Notes to this supplement

1. Qatari Civil Code, Law No. 22 of 2004.

2. Increased costs under Qatari construction contracts Clyde & Co (23 May 2022).

3. Middle East spotlight: contractual cost escalation mechanisms Pinsent Masons (9 April 2026).

4. Navigating force majeure and exceptional circumstances under Qatari law Al Tamimi & Company (12 March 2026).

5. Effects of current regional developments on construction projects in Qatar Sultan Al-Abdulla & Partners (2 April 2026).

6. Amendments to Qatar’s Tenders and Auctions Law Mondaq (28 May 2025).

This article is published for general information purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice.