International Construction Law Review
OVERTAKEN BY EVENTS: WHAT DELAY QUANTIFICATION CAN TELL US ABOUT CAUSALITY
Stuart Jones*
Manager, Secretariat Partners UK LLP
ABSTRACT
This article examines the extent to which as-planned versus as-built delay analysis can be used to quantify objectively the delay caused to a project by a particular activity. It presents the derivation of simple arithmetic equations for the delay and recovery at each activity in an as-built schedule and applies them to the records from a construction project. The results are discussed.
I. INTRODUCTION
“Establishing the occurrence of an employer delay that entitles the contractor to an extension of time is only the first step in making an extension of time claim. The contractor must also prove that the event delayed completion of the project”.1
When assessing delay after completion of a project, it is common practice to compare the actual performance of the work to the original plan that was agreed at the time of contract. The assessment is generally performed in two parts, one of which is a factual inquiry by a delay analyst with a view to establishing the causes and durations of the delays. The other is a legal assessment of entitlement to an extension of time which relies in part on the delay analyst’s conclusions.
This article presents the derivation of simple arithmetic equations for delay and recovery at each activity in an as-built schedule and applies them to the records from a construction project. The calculation results explain a limit of what can be deduced directly from an as-planned vs. as-built delay analysis and highlight a difference between critical paths that are determined using the “longest path” and “contemporaneous” methods.2
* Stuart Jones is a Manager at Secretariat Partners UK LLP. Email: sjones@secretariat-intl.com. He is a Chartered Engineer and a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, and has 20 years of experience in pipeline engineering. Mr Jones would like to extend his gratitude to Corentin Fuller
and Ludovic Solomon for their help with this paper.
1 Rankin, E M and Rosenberg, K (eds), Dealing with Delay and Disruption on Construction Projects (1st Edition, Thomson Reuters, 2022), Section V, paragraph 2-120.
2 These methods are described in, for example, the Society of Construction Law, Delay and Disruption Protocol (2nd Edition, Hinckley, February 2017), p 36, paragraphs 11.6(d–e), (hereafter “SCL Protocol”).
278