When drafting a quantum and/or delay claim based on several events, claimants commonly use inference rather than causation to build their arguments.  

In the midst of grappling with the intricacies of drafting a construction claim, two pivotal components demand our attention: Global Claims and Contemporaneous Records.

A simplistic, retrospective methodology, which in its simplest form compares the as-built program to the planned (baseline) program.

To effectively support construction claims, here are key types of data you should record and reference in your timeline.

Maintaining a detailed timeline of events will support an extension of time and cost claim. Here are the main reasons why a timeline is important.

Tunnelling projects are complicated, and all parties — the customer, EPC contractors and subcontractors — expect the work to be done on-time and on budget but delays and cost overruns happen.

Whether it be assessing insurance claims, variation claims, or the remediation of defective works, a quantum expert is called upon to provide an independent subjective opinion to assist an insurer or a tribunal or, in some cases, to help parties settle a matter outside of formal proceedings.

The term “Contract Program” is often used in reference to the Construction or Contractor’s Program. The Construction (or Contractor’s) Program is basically the execution plan and timeline of how the works under the Contract will be carried out and measured. It should consider the key sequences of work and resource dependencies. It should also, depending on the Contract, identify the critical path and the relationships between the planned activities and interfaces.

In this article we are going to consider the differences between mitigation, acceleration, and constructive acceleration. The recent case of V601 v Probuild[1] is of interest, as it demonstrates that a constructive acceleration claim can be successful in certain circumstances.

Project teams are often told to keep daily or even hourly records of events that occur on-site if a claim for additional time and cost arises. These records are known as contemporaneous records in that they are ‘recorded’ when the event occurs.

A common question when demonstrating entitlement to an Extension of Time is, who owns the float?

When considering who owns the float, one first must understand the various definitions of 'float' typically associated with construction projects. Secondly, one must understand the applicable contractual clause relating to claiming an extension of time.

In this on demand presentation Andrew McKenna and Paul McArd discuss what a global claim is and how they can be avoided by using quantum and delay experts.

When drafting a quantum and/or delay claim based on several events, claimants commonly use inference rather than causation to build their arguments. This approach is sometimes used by claimants as they tend to focus on the monetary amounts lost and/or the delays they have incurred, rather than identifying causation.