Explore how early dispute resolution, supported by forensic quantity surveying and delay expertise, can help construction lawyers assess claims, manage risk, contain costs and resolve disputes before positions become entrenched.

If delay experts come to different conclusions regarding the quantum of time in delay, analysis methodology may have dictated the outcome, as White v PBS demonstrates.

When you receive a rectification estimate, from your own expert or the other side's, there are three key questions quantum expert witness, Paul McArd advises you ask.

A quantum expert witness explains how to build up a defensible m² rate from labour, materials, overheads and profit, and why it beats global claims and book rates in disputes.

Examining concurrent delay in construction contracts with guidance on delay expert witness evidence, forensic delay analysis and managing concurrent delay disputes in Australia.

Explore how construction delays develop over time, how critical paths shift, and why effective delay analysis must trace cause, effect, project records and impacts on completion.

Delay Expert credibility depends on thorough evidence collection, impartial analysis, and adherence to recognised standards. Zweite vs PSA demonstrates lessons for delay and quantum experts.

The As-built programme may be the most underrated document on any project for delay experts. A vital record of what really happened, activity by activity, as the project unfolded.

The strongest prolongation claims are not necessarily those supported by the largest volume of records. Delay experts build the strongest claims with an evidentiary pathway that is clear, logical and capable of being tested.

Experience isn't evidence. Santos v Fluor shows why an effective quantum expert witness needs more than industry experience. Courts expect transparent methodology, construction costing expertise and evidence that withstands scrutiny.

The decisions in A.M.O. Rifat Holdings Pty Ltd v Dib is likely to become an important authority on quantum meruit and the Court’s treatment of the evidence. For expert quantity surveyors the judgment demonstrates what good valuation evidence looks like.

By the time cross-examination starts, it's too late to fix a weak methodology. The discipline has to be built into the report from the first draft: causation traced event by event, assumptions labelled as assumptions, and so on.

The work of a quantum expert witness sits at the intersection of quantity surveying, contract law, and forensic investigation, and the experts who do it well are fluent in all three.

On most large projects, delay and disruption get bundled together. But they are not the same thing. Delay impacts the critical path. Disruption affects how work is carried out.

The decision in Alexanderson Earthmover Pty Ltd v Civil Mining & Construction Pty Ltd is a reminder that many standby and productivity claims fail before evidence is tested.

In Amey LG v Cumbria County Council, the Court did not reject the measured mile but it stripped it of the mystique that some experts trade on. This UK case is essential reading for quantum experts and quantity surveyors.

Abigroup vs Sydney Catchment shows how courts assess expert reasoning, and why conclusions must be supported by an exposed logical process. For expert Quantity Surveyors, those points go to the heart of credible evidence. 

Delay claims do not always fail on time, they fail on money. That is the lesson of Walton Construction Pty Ltd v Illawarra Hotel Company Pty Ltd. Walton succeeded on extensions of time but the referee’s approach to delay costs was rejected

Expert evidence in construction disputes is not assessed only by weight. If the foundation for expertise is not properly established, the evidence may never be considered at all as the decision in Dura Constructions v Hue Boutique Living reminds us.

Producing expert quantum reports is often written about in the abstract. Reports should be rigorous. Costings should be substantiated. Methodology should be demonstrable and defensible.