(1) Explain your problem, don't simply post "This isn't working". What were you doing when you faced the problem? What have you tried to resolve - did you look for a solution using "Search" ? Has it happened just once or several times?
(2) It's also good to get feedback when a solution is found, return to the original post to explain how it was resolved so that more people can also use the results.
Dear Mr Zoltan
I need some advice on below scenario
We have project having milestones
One of the Milestone is installation works, we have an extension of time earlier due to employer delays.
Currently that work supposed to be finish in June, 2017 however we unable to complete the works by the extended date of the milestone.
As of October, 17 - we are still working on milestone.
In August - employer gave us access to one of the sub milestone activities which supposed to be earlier as per approved baseline programme. And this work in progress parallel to our works which we supposed to finish but not completed.
Shall the employer delay are concurrent delays in this above case. Any case law reference document will be much appreciated.
Thanks
Bilal Rafiq
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Hi Bialla
But you do have the Unjust Enrichment clause in your code which means that no party can gain any benefit from his own default.
Besr regards
Mike T.
Dear Mike
Thanks for your response, in Middle east we donot have any law refer to dominat cause /apportionment system.
Now i our project senario - contractor unable to complete the work as per the Milestone completion and also employer did not allow us to work on some part of the work .
So mostly we discuss whether this was is critical or not- so my understanding is if the works not completed as per the contract dates then its critical for Milestone completion as its already expired- IS THIS TRUE?
Second, please advise if the Empoyer delay appear after expirty of contract Milestone finsih date and contractor finish those works approximate same time period- It means the effect of both delays are same- and should be considered same. IS THIS TRUE
Please guide on this.
Thanks Bilal Rafiq
Hi Bialla
Concurrency is complex and a lot depends on the jurisdiction where the work is and the law governing the contract.
Last week in the UK a case settled the position in the UK and we are back to the dominant delay situation.
In most of the rest of the world they follow an apportionment system.
On this basis if the total delay was caused by a contribution form each party of 50% each then their would be 50% LAD's and 50% Loss and expense.
In the UK if the contractor has caused the dominant delay then he gets all the LAD's and no Loss and expense.
If the employer delay is domnant then it is the overlap that counts with the Contractor getting Loss &Expense for the end bit and no costs for for the rest.
Best regards
Mike T.
I will let Mr Zoltan answer this.
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies