Andrew McKenna is a Melbourne-based construction delay expert who spent years managing Victorian projects before analysing delay for courts and tribunals.
Construction Delay Expert in Melbourne
Andrew prepares independent delay evidence for disputes in the Supreme Court of Victoria, the County Court, VCAT and security of payment adjudication.
Experience in Victoria
Andrew has been engaged as a delay expert on Victorian building and subcontract disputes, a VCAT demolition matter, and security of payment claims on sewer and energy projects. Before becoming an expert he worked as site manager and planning manager on the Regional Rail Link, the Western Highway upgrade between Burrumbeet and Trawalla, rail corridor shutdowns and a 70-kilometre regional pipeline.
Construction Delay in Melbourne
Victorian courts, tribunals and laws
Andrew prepares delay evidence for disputes heard across the Victorian system:
Supreme Court of Victoria, including the Technology, Engineering and Construction List, for major project disputes
County Court of Victoria, for mid-sized building and subcontract claims [CHECK]
VCAT, for domestic and commercial building disputes, including matters under the Domestic Building Contracts Act 1995 (Vic)
Adjudication under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002 (Vic), where delay and extension of time arguments often decide the outcome within days
Arbitration and expert determination under the dispute clauses of Victorian infrastructure contracts
Each forum asks for something different. An adjudicator has days, not months, so the delay case must be clear on the papers. VCAT expects practical, plainly explained evidence. The Supreme Court tests the method in detail through joint reports and cross-examination. Andrew shapes the analysis to fit the forum from the start.
What Victorian courts have said about delay
V601 Developments v Probuild Constructions [2021] VSC 849
A mixed-use development in Abbotsford, built in eight portions. The developer claimed liquidated damages; Probuild said it was owed more time. Justice Digby found the project manager had failed to certify extensions of time Probuild was entitled to, and Probuild recovered acceleration costs as damages. On the delay evidence, the court preferred analysis grounded in what actually happened on site and found a forecast-based model "significantly less reliable" where as-built records were available. Andrew's view: if the job has been built, the delay case has to be built from the as-built record.
Kane Constructions v Sopov [2005] VSC 237
A long-standing Victorian authority on extensions of time. The court looked closely at whether the delaying events actually affected the critical path to completion, rather than simply occurring during the job. It remains a reference point for how Victorian courts test a contractor's entitlement to more time.
Notable for Victorian claims
In both cases the outcome turned on records. Contractors with a maintained as-built programme, daily diaries and clear notices are in a far stronger position than those relying on a planned programme updated after the fact. Andrew has written a practical guide on this: The Daily Delay Measure: Maintaining an As-Built Programme for Construction Disputes.
Frequently Asked Questions
-
Yes. Andrew has been engaged as a delay expert on VCAT matters, including a demolition dispute, and tailors his reports to VCAT's practical, plain-English approach.
-
Yes. Andrew has prepared delay analysis for adjudications under the Victorian Act on sewer and energy projects. Call early, because adjudication timeframes are short and the delay analysis must be ready when the application or response is lodged.
-
Yes. Before becoming an expert, Andrew worked on the Regional Rail Link (20+ occupation stages around Southern Cross Station), the Western Highway upgrade between Burrumbeet and Trawalla, rail corridor shutdowns, maintenance facilities and a 70-kilometre regional pipeline. He knows how Victorian rail and road projects are staged and where they lose time.
Insights
![When Acceleration Costs Can Be Recovered: Motherwell Bridge v Micafil [2002]](https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/65af0cb0b236385076bf98f3/1771876953862-SSC6HLN6NBCDIBLFKHIQ/unsplash-image-Wm8opOd-MDE.jpg)
