Entering Contracts with your Corporate Clients: key issues
Overview
On one view, contracts only matter when things go wrong: for example, when your invoice is not paid or when there is a dispute over a service "failure". But, a well-prepared contract should actually make life easier for both parties, as it will clarify upfront exactly what services will be delivered for what fees and will create a mechanism for resolving any disagreements as amicably as possible.
The most common practical problem today, particularly for DSPs, is that lengthy, highly-technical, "standard agreements" are produced by the legal departments of RMCs or corporate clients and there may be very limited opportunity to negotiate terms. Even if such an opportunity exists, it is just not commercially viable to have every draft agreement fully vetted, on your behalf, by a lawyer.
So, if you are checking over a contract without the benefit of legal advice, what are the most important things you should be looking for?
Financial Clauses
These clauses will probably be your starting point when you are reviewing a new agreement and you will want to be clear about several things:-
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), contained in an Agreement, can assist both parties to focus on the things that really matter in terms of achieving a successful business relationship. But, problems arise when the wording of KPIs becomes so detailed and complicated that they almost become meaningless. Particular care has to be taken when failure to achieve KPIs can incur financial penalties. If there is to be a link between KPIs and fees, you may want to also have the opportunity to earn bonuses for high performance and not simply be subject to potential penalties.
Of course, it is not only the financial clauses in Relocation Service Agreements which can cause you difficulties. Below are some of the other main clauses which require particular attention:-
Wading through several pages of DP clauses is an unattractive prospect, but for EU-based businesses, already familiar with the high levels of data protection imposed under EU law, there should not be any real surprises contained in the contract wording. However, it always pays to read these clauses carefully, looking out for anything which you are uncomfortable with, e.g.:-
A client would reasonably expect you to accept the following basic obligations:-
Under the UK Bribery Act, which is the nearest thing we have to a global standard for anti-corruption law, clients may be held liable for failure to prevent bribery by their contractors. This means that relocation service agreements will usually contain very specific compliance obligations on suppliers. It is important to be aware of any penalties or indemnities which the client can impose for non-compliance. Could these be damaging to your business?
Relocation service contracts will normally specify the types of insurance cover which the supplier must have in place and set financial levels for each category of cover (e.g. professional indemnity cover of not less than €1 million per claim). The wording of insurance clauses can be very technical and you may wish to refer the contract wording to your insurance broker, who can confirm if you are currently compliant or whether additional cover will be required - and at what cost.
These are clauses which impose a financial penalty on the supplier for a failure to comply with particular obligations under the contract. It is clearly important to be aware of any penalties contained in a contract. In many countries, a contractual penalty is unenforceable unless it represents a genuine estimate of the likely cost to the client of the breach of contract; i.e. it should not be "penal" in nature.
A clause which sets out a simple process for parties to attempt to resolve disputes amicably can be valuable. The next step, short of court action, will often be an arbitration process. Arbitration can also be very useful, but less so (from a European perspective) if the arbitration location is stated to be the client's HQ location, e.g. in the United States.
Negotiating the removal of "unreasonable" contract terms
The starting point, of course, is that you want to do business with this new client. But a contract which you believe contains unreasonable terms will require you to have a follow-up discussion with the client. You should highlight the clauses which are causing you serious concern and explain why.
It is not uncommon to find that inappropriate clauses have been copied from a previous contract in error and there should be no difficulty in having these removed or amended. On the other hand, it is clearly more challenging to negotiate contract wording which the client imposes in all their contracts as a "standard term". In this latter situation, you may still be able to have a clause removed where it is inconsistent with your national law (e.g. an obligation to carry out certain "employee background checks").
Another approach, which may help to break a deadlock, is to accept a "side letter" from the client, confirming that a particular clause will not be enforced in practice (e.g. a client's standard clause relating to annual penetration testing of your IT systems). This can be a useful compromise in situations where the client is otherwise refusing to amend the wording of its standard clauses.
Conclusion
In my experience, the best clients are those which adopt a partnership approach to their suppliers and contractors. They will not seek to impose unfair contract terms and will take the time to explain why a "standard clause" is regarded as essential and also listen to your specific concerns.
I hope that this overview can assist your future contract negotiations - and will look forward to your feedback!