Will is currently completing his Juris Doctor at the University of Melbourne and is interested in helping to provide equitable and efficient access to legal resources.
Contents
You’ve lined up a great project, you’ve found a reliable subcontractor (or you’re the subcontractor), and everyone’s keen to get started.
Then someone says: “Can we make this exclusive?”
Exclusivity clauses come up a lot in construction and civil works - especially where timelines are tight, specialist trades are scarce, or a principal wants certainty that you won’t “disappear” onto another job mid-project.
This guide (updated for current industry contracting practices and compliance focus) breaks down what an exclusivity clause is, when it makes sense, what risks to watch for, and how to draft it so it actually works for your project.
What Is An Exclusivity Clause In A Construction Contract?
An exclusivity clause is a part of your construction contract that limits one party’s ability to work for, supply to, or contract with other people during a certain period (or in relation to a certain project).
In plain terms, it’s the “you’re with us (for now)” clause.
In construction, “exclusivity” can look like:
- Exclusivity of labour: the contractor or subcontractor agrees to prioritise your project and not take on other work that would affect delivery.
- Exclusivity of supply: a supplier agrees to provide particular materials only to you for the duration of the job (or within a region).
- Exclusivity of territory or customer: a contractor agrees not to work for a competitor principal/developer on certain sites or in a defined area.
- Exclusivity of negotiation: while you negotiate or tender, the other party agrees not to negotiate with anyone else for the same scope for a limited time (this is often documented in a preliminary agreement).
It’s important to be clear about what is exclusive. A vague “exclusive arrangement” can create confusion and disputes later, especially when the project gets busy and resources get stretched.
How Exclusivity Is Different From A Non-Compete
Exclusivity and non-compete restraints can overlap, but they’re not the same thing.
- Exclusivity is usually about commitment and allocation of time/resources (often tied to a project and timeframe).
- Non-compete restraints are about restricting competition (often broader and more sensitive legally).
If what you really want is a restriction on competitive work, you may be stepping into restraint-of-trade territory, which needs careful drafting and a genuine business justification.
When Does An Exclusivity Clause Actually Make Sense?
Exclusivity isn’t automatically “good” or “bad”. It’s a tool - and like any tool, it works best in the right situation.
In construction, an exclusivity clause can be genuinely useful where you need certainty around resourcing and delivery.
Common Situations Where Exclusivity Helps
- Specialist subcontractors: for example, a niche waterproofing crew, lift installer, façade contractor, or a specialist roading team that’s booked out months ahead.
- High-risk sequencing: where one trade’s delay causes major downstream impacts (and costs).
- Fast-track programmes: where you need assurance your contractor won’t accept other work that competes for the same key people or plant.
- Confidential pricing or methods: where you’re sharing sensitive tender rates, methodologies, or value engineering options.
- Supplier allocation issues: where there are known supply constraints and you need priority access to materials.
When Exclusivity Can Be Overkill
On the flip side, exclusivity may be unnecessary (or commercially unrealistic) when:
- the project is small and straightforward;
- the subcontractor is a genuine small operator who needs multiple jobs to manage cash flow;
- you’re not offering enough certainty (or price) to justify tying up resources;
- the scope is uncertain and the programme is likely to change.
A practical rule of thumb: if you’re asking for exclusivity, you should be giving something meaningful in return (like a minimum volume of work, a mobilisation payment, a retainer, or clearer scheduling commitments).
What Are The Legal And Commercial Risks Of Exclusivity Clauses?
Exclusivity can reduce project risk - but it can also create new ones if it’s drafted too broadly, too vaguely, or without a workable “escape hatch”.
Here are the main issues we see in construction disputes.
1) It Can Be Hard To Enforce If It’s Too Vague
If the clause doesn’t clearly define what the party can’t do, you can end up arguing over things like:
- Does “exclusive” mean they can’t work on any other job, or just not on competing jobs?
- Does it apply to the whole business, or only the key people assigned to your site?
- What if they had pre-existing contracts already booked in?
Construction contracts are already busy documents. If you add exclusivity, it needs to be as specific as the scope, programme, and variations process.
2) It Can Create Pricing And Capacity Problems
From a commercial perspective, exclusivity often increases price - because you’re asking the other party to give up other opportunities.
If you want a subcontractor to reserve labour or plant, they may price in:
- idle time risk (if your programme slips);
- opportunity cost;
- increased overhead allocation to your project.
This isn’t necessarily a bad thing - it just needs to be acknowledged upfront so you don’t end up with a “cheap” contract that becomes unworkable mid-project.
3) You May Trigger Restraint-Of-Trade Concerns
If your exclusivity clause effectively stops someone from working in their industry (even temporarily), it can start to look like a restraint of trade. In New Zealand, restraints need to be reasonable and no wider than necessary to protect a legitimate business interest.
This is one reason why it’s usually safer to draft exclusivity around:
- a specific project;
- a defined timeframe;
- specific personnel/plant;
- and measurable performance outcomes.
If you’re thinking of bundling exclusivity with broader restrictions, getting tailored advice is important.
4) It Can Clash With Variations, Delays, And Extensions Of Time
Construction rarely runs exactly to plan. If the principal delays, design changes occur, or weather pushes out milestones, an exclusivity clause can become unfair quickly - and that’s when disputes tend to land.
Common flashpoints include:
- the subcontractor being forced to “stay exclusive” while your project is paused;
- the contractor claiming the subcontractor breached exclusivity by taking other work during a delay;
- arguments about whether delay costs or prolongation costs apply because exclusivity prevented other revenue.
This is where your contract structure matters. If you’re engaging contractors or subcontractors directly, it’s worth ensuring your core contract is robust - whether that’s a tailored Service Agreement or a more construction-specific suite with clear change control.
5) Reputation And Relationship Risk
Even when exclusivity is legally enforceable, it can damage relationships if it’s perceived as one-sided.
Construction is a relationship-driven industry. If you want priority, a fair exclusivity clause can work - but if the clause looks like “all downside, no upside”, you may lose good subcontractors or get lower engagement.
How To Draft A Construction Exclusivity Clause That Works (Without Creating Headaches)
The best exclusivity clauses are practical, measurable, and aligned with how the project will actually run.
If you’re including exclusivity in a construction contract, these are the key drafting points to consider.
Define The Scope Of Exclusivity
Start by being clear on what is exclusive. For example:
- Project-only exclusivity: “The subcontractor must not accept work that would materially affect its ability to meet the programme for this project.”
- Personnel-based exclusivity: “The subcontractor must ensure the nominated site supervisor and crew are allocated to the project for X days per week.”
- Plant/equipment exclusivity: “The subcontractor will reserve the listed plant for the project and not deploy it elsewhere without consent.”
This approach is usually more workable than trying to stop a whole business from taking other jobs.
Set A Clear Time Period (And Don’t Make It Longer Than Needed)
Exclusivity should have start and end dates, or a clear trigger (like practical completion of a defined scope).
If you leave it open-ended, you increase:
- the risk of dispute;
- the chance the clause is considered unreasonable;
- the chance the subcontractor prices the job higher than necessary.
Include A Practical “Consent” Mechanism
Most projects run better when exclusivity isn’t absolute. Consider including a process where the party can request written consent to take other work - and your contract can say you won’t unreasonably withhold consent if there’s no impact on delivery.
This keeps the clause flexible, and it also reduces the temptation for someone to quietly breach it.
Tie Exclusivity To Performance Outcomes
Exclusivity is easiest to manage when it’s connected to clear milestones and deliverables.
For example:
- exclusivity applies during critical path activities;
- exclusivity applies until a key handover date;
- exclusivity applies only if the principal meets payment timeframes and provides access/site readiness.
In other words, make it part of a balanced bargain - not a blanket restriction.
Address Variations, Delays, And Programme Changes
This is the big one in construction.
If the project is delayed or varied, your exclusivity clause should explain what happens. Options include:
- exclusivity is suspended during certain delay events;
- exclusivity only continues if the contractor pays a holding fee/retainer;
- either party can renegotiate resourcing commitments if the programme shifts beyond an agreed tolerance.
This is also where having a clear contract amendment process matters - especially if your scope evolves. If you need to formally change obligations mid-project, a structured Contract Amendment approach can save a lot of back-and-forth later.
Consider Confidentiality Alongside Exclusivity
Sometimes the real concern isn’t that the contractor will work elsewhere - it’s that your pricing, methodology, or commercial strategy will end up in the wrong hands.
In those cases, you may need confidentiality protections either within the contract or via a separate NDA. In practice, many construction businesses use a tailored Non-Disclosure Agreement during tendering or early negotiation, then carry key confidentiality terms into the final contract.
Do I Need Exclusivity, Or Is There A Better Option?
Exclusivity is only one way to manage project risk. Depending on your role and bargaining power, there may be alternatives that give you protection without locking everyone in too tightly.
Alternatives To An Exclusivity Clause
- Priority / best endeavours clause: requires the contractor to prioritise your project, without banning other work.
- Resourcing commitments: specify minimum labour hours, named personnel, or response times.
- Liquidated damages or service credits: incentives to meet deadlines (needs careful drafting).
- Milestone-based payments: aligns cash flow with progress, which can encourage allocation of resources.
- Termination rights: if performance slips, you can step in earlier (again, needs to be fair and workable).
If you’re engaging a subcontractor, your core issue might be clarity around scope and responsibility. A well-structured Sub-Contractor Agreement often does more to prevent disputes than a heavy-handed exclusivity clause, because it sets expectations around programme, variations, defects, and site coordination.
What If I’m Being Asked To Agree To Exclusivity?
If you’re the contractor or subcontractor, an exclusivity clause can be a real risk if it’s not balanced.
Before you agree, consider asking:
- Is the scope and programme clear enough for me to commit exclusively?
- What happens if the principal delays the work or changes the scope?
- Am I being compensated for keeping capacity available?
- Does it prevent me from completing pre-existing contracts?
- How will “breach” be measured, and what are the consequences?
It’s also worth checking your broader legal setup if you’re scaling and taking on larger projects. For example, if you’re operating through a company and bringing in co-founders or investors, your internal governance documents (like a Company Constitution or a shareholder arrangement) can impact who has authority to sign contracts and how risks are managed across the business.
Key Takeaways
- An exclusivity clause limits a party’s ability to take on other work (or supply others) during a defined time or for a defined scope, and it’s common in construction where resourcing certainty is critical.
- Exclusivity works best when it is specific and practical - for example, tied to key personnel, plant, or critical project phases, rather than a blanket ban on all other work.
- Overly broad exclusivity can create enforceability issues, price increases, disputes during delays/variations, and potential restraint-of-trade concerns.
- A strong clause should clearly define scope, timeframe, consent mechanisms, what happens during delays, and how exclusivity interacts with programme changes and variations.
- In many cases, alternatives like resourcing commitments, priority clauses, clear milestones, and well-drafted subcontractor terms can manage risk without strict exclusivity.
- Because construction projects and commercial relationships vary so much, exclusivity clauses should be tailored - generic templates can miss the realities of sequencing, delays, and changing scope.
If you’d like help reviewing or drafting construction contracts (including exclusivity clauses that are fair and enforceable), you can reach us at 0800 002 184 or team@sprintlaw.co.nz for a free, no-obligations chat.
