Calculation of delay duration - forecast PC vs contractual PC date

Techniques and Methods for Assessing Delays

The Contemporaneous Method hinges on the principle that in order to determine the impact of delaying events, the status of the project must be established at the time those events occurred. In essence, the schedule first needs to be updated at the time of the delay and, second, to be updated to incorporate any planning changes to coincide with the contractor’s plan for pursuing the work. The goal of this method is to develop a freeze-frame picture of the project — identifying the delaying event, the impact of the delay, and the plan to complete the remaining work at the time the delay occurred.

Two approaches are commonly used as part of this method: Time Impact Analysis, which looks at a particular point in time and utilizes a series of chronological time slices to evaluate major scheduling variations that occurred during the project, and Window Analysis, which examines the critical path between two points in time and assesses the delay as it occurs.

Courts and boards hold that contemporaneous schedule updates should be considered in evaluating delay. The Contemporaneous Method is favored because it provides a baseline for measuring delay; the status of the project at the time a delay occurs; the impact of delaying events on remaining work; and insight into float, changes to critical path, and revisions to the plan to complete.

AACE Recommended Practice - Time Impact Analysis-52R-06

Forensic Schedule Analysis:  Example Implementation - The techniques explored here or variations on these techniques have been commonly referred to as “windows Analysis” or “Time Impact Analysis.”

Please be reminded that there are other delay analysis methods and their calculations will differ.

Construction Delay Analysis Techniques

Good luck.

I disagree with Mike but this may be jurisdictional - Adjudication laws differ.... 

Generally, the Adjudication determination is binding and cannot be challenged in itself - the intention is to get a quick resolution and payment made to the contractor or subcontracts.  BUT it is an interim determination.  Depending on your contract (and jurisprudence) the fact an Adjudication determination has been delivered in the space of a few weeks does not preclude moving the subject of dispute to a final determination in either the Courts or Arbitration at the appropriate time. 

These processes are not about attacking the Adjudication determination - this is final and very difficult to dispute. The Court case / Arbitration is about moving from an interim determination reached through a 'quick-and-dirty' process to a final determination reached through proper judicial processes.  Adjudicators are allowed to get things wrong (which would appear to be your situation) and their determination is still binding.

It is because Adjudication is only an interim process to free up cash flow its determinations cannot be appealed - the solution to a perceived wrong determination is to follow the contractual processes defined in the agreed contract (usually Arbitration). The only effect of the Adjudication is in settling the final payments in a judgment/award.  If you have paid $100,000 under an adjudication determination and the Arbitrator finds you should have only paid $80,000 the contractor owes you $20,000 (and you have 'won' the case so may be entitled to your costs).

But seek proper advice from a suitably qualified (and experienced) lawyer in your country. 

Pat (former Australian Adjudicator). 

Hi Gavin
Until challenged in court the adjudicator's award stands and that can only be overturned if he is wrong in law.
So you are stuck with it.
An Arbitration will not change an adjudication.
Best regards
Mike Testor

Hi Gavin
Until challenged in court the adjudicator's award stands and that can only be overturned if he is wrong in law.
So you are stuck with it.
An Arbitration will not change an adjudication.
Best regards
Mike Testor