Suppose we will do a portion of a superstructure and we will start from excavating the existing foundation done by others. We are already in delay in doing this portion of the superstructure and beacuse of that it became critical. After excavating we found that the foundation does not have the correct setting out and beacuse of that the structural design team need to do a re-design of the superstructure. Remember that we are already in delay but because of this another delay event we will further be delayed. Can we claim an EOT for that? Or the Client can argue that if we started our work on time, when it was not yet critical, then that setting out problem was found out earlier.
Delay in our own activity then further delay not caused by us
Forum Sponsor
Top Posters
Julian Pegg
1 posts
Peter Nagy
2 posts
Raymund de Laza
17 posts
Syed_Asad
0 posts
Tony Greyvenstein
0 posts
Ahmed Al-Jubouri
13 posts
Umar Alvi
3 posts
Sibusiso Mahlalela
0 posts
Michael Samanyayi
3 posts
Simon Gumede
0 posts
Hi Nathan
Welcome to Planning Planet.
Your advice is basically correct but the EoT allowed is the Further Delay Period that extends beyond the Contractor's Delay which is added to the current completion date.
But then we must remember that this principle is good in English Law and may not extend to the Phillipines or wherever Ronn is now working.
Best regards
Mike Testro
I would think yes, you can claim the EOT for the redesign delay only.
The way I see it, you used up the float when you got behind and the activity became critical. Since it is generally accepted* that the float belongs to the project (whoever gets to it first, uses it), the fact that the structural re-design became critical is unfortunate (for the Client) but irrelevant and the associated extension of time should be claimable.
*Unless there is a clause in the contract that says the float belongs to the Client or similar...
Hi Ronn
This is a classic case of a Relevant Event Delay occurring during a period of Contractor Culpable Delay.
(aslo known as the Dot - On pronciple)
The point turns on whether the Relevant Event Delay caused any further delay.
If so then the further delay should be added to the completion date as an EoT with costs for that extra period.
See Balfour Beatty v Chestermount for the ruling.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Dear Ronn
My thought is that you would need to look at the updated schedule
However, Senior members maybe better placed to answer to your query.
Best regards
Pranab