Over the last decade, Egypt has witnessed an increase in the number of public–private partnership (PPP) projects, specifically in infrastructure, as a result of the growing interest and popularity of various entities participating in such projects. Public infrastructure systems are no longer thought to be exclusively provided by the government; instead, the private sector’s contribution in the provision of such services is increasing. However, not every PPP program has been equally effective or has made the optimum use of planning and decision-making. PPP programs need to ensure that all relevant elements are carefully considered, appropriately structured, and correctly applied. The possibility of a project as a result of poor risk allocation is increased, if the potential dispute causing factors are not taken into account, and correspondingly acted upon. This study aims to develop a legal framework focusing on Infrastructure projects funded by Multilateral Development Banks, aiding all project entities to address their diversified purposes, to optimize each entity’s objectives and resolve conflicts up front, with consideration to financial and legal aspects. This can be accomplished by addressing the three main contractual relationships; Concession agreement, Lending agreement, and EPC agreement, focusing on the most crucial contract provisions that have the potential of causing conflicts between parties, namely Governing Law and Dispute Resolution in each of the three agreements of a public–private partnership project. It can be concluded that having different governing laws in the agreements would not affect the success of the project. However, only the selection of the statutory requirements to be applied. Moreover, in regards to dispute resolution, conflicts cause delays, which lead to higher costs. Therefore, the effectiveness of the dispute settlement process is important in luring Multilateral Development Banks and private investors to collaborate with the government. Thus, it is recommended that the Dispute Resolution Clause in the three agreements follow the same procedural timeline, as well as ensuring unbiases.
