Skip to content

Should I use the main contract form for my subcontracts?

Usually no: use the subcontract form that matches your main contract, which is built to sit beneath it, rather than the main contract form itself, which is written for a different relationship.

Updated: 22 August 2026

The answer

The instinct to place a subcontract on the same form as the main contract is understandable but usually wrong, because a main contract form governs the relationship between an employer and a main contractor, not between a contractor and a subcontractor, and the two differ in ways the form encodes throughout. The standard families anticipate this and publish dedicated subcontract forms designed to sit beneath their main contracts, so the sensible default is the matching subcontract form: it carries the right payment machinery and notice provisions, and terms already shaped to pass main-contract obligations down without awkward translation. Using the main contract form means editing out or working around dozens of provisions that assume an employer on the other side, and every edit is a chance to introduce an inconsistency or a gap. Equally, a bespoke house order a buyer wrote years ago is worth reviewing rather than trusting by habit, because it may not comply with the current Construction Act payment requirements or may not sit back to back with the main contract you are working under. The decisive test is not which form looks most familiar but which your commercial team can actually administer correctly month after month, because a form whose payment windows and notice provisions get operated properly protects you far better than a theoretically watertight one nobody on the job understands well enough to run.

Example

Picture a contractor who places a joinery subcontract on a copy of their JCT main contract, striking through the clauses that obviously do not fit and leaving the rest. Months later a payment dispute exposes the problem: the payment provisions they left in were written for the employer-to-contractor relationship, the due dates and notice periods do not align with how they are actually paying downstream, and an amendment they missed leaves a Construction Act compliance gap a subcontractor's adjudicator is happy to exploit. The matching JCT subcontract form would have given them payment machinery built for the job and terms already designed to sit beneath the main contract. The main form can be adapted, but the dedicated subcontract form starts where the adapted main form only arrives after a great deal of risky editing.