Table 10 shows that the Procuring Authority was more likely to terminate the project than the Project Company, however these are small numbers. Our study shows that four projects were terminated due to Procuring Authority default or voluntary termination. The reasons for Procuring Authority termination varied from a case of voluntary termination on a transport project, which appeared to have failed a “public interest” test, an event of the Procuring Authority’s default in Ukraine due to political reasons to two cases of Procuring Authority default due to its failure to provide land and a failure to provide coal on a thermal energy project. Most terminations occurred soon after financial close (within two years), before construction was complete or even started. This suggests there were problems with how the project was set up in the first place.

Where the Procuring Authority terminated the PPP contract, it was generally before it was in operations and after deciding that the project was not worth continuing. In the Prato-Signa link in Italy and Vengalem Kuttipuram highway in India this was after delays in beginning construction, while for the Aqaba Port in Jordan it was decided to expand existing facilities rather than build a new facility. For the Sao Paulo Metro Line project the contract was terminated (due to a failure by the Project Company to deliver construction on time) but a new PPP contract with another Project Company was signed soon after.

Go to 4.6 Other claims