Our contractor is building a office block. The structural steel was scheduled to arrive on site in the 12th week, but the nominated supplier delivered it two weeks late.
The contractor missed the milestone for completing the steel frame, pushing back mechanical, electrical, cladding trades. I am tasked to write a simple report to answer the Engineers challenge of "Is this delay excusable (entitling the contractor to an EOT), or is it non‑excusable (i.e. our contractor’s risk)?
My contracts manager is not very helpful so I want to try to show I can take this forward to him with something that adds some value. Please help guide me!
Thanks Stephen, this seems to align with the advice from Sanjeet and Patrick Weaver.
I agree that once the contract enters into the subcontract they are liable for the terms they agree in that contract - irrespective of any "recommendation to use" coming from the client.
S.
Patrick, that is amazing advice, thankyou it really helps point us in a useful direction.
Thanks David.
Nominated suppliers and subcontractors are 'recommended' by the client - once the contractor has entered into a subcontract or supply contract the responsibility for managing the work shifts to the main contractor. This is despite the fact the contract makes accepting the 'recommendation' compulsory. There are some options for a claim but these are limited to a late nomination by the client and/or any actions by the client that caused the late supply. Some contracts have provisions that vary this general position but they are not common.
It depends on the nature of contract.
If the supplier was nominated by the contractor, delay is non-excusable. The contractor nominated the supplier and should have updated his risk register. The supply must have been on critical path and has caused delay in subsequent works. The contractor must have issued letters or memos to the supplier. It was the responsibility of the Contractor to ensure on-time delivery by the supplier.
- If contractor fulfilled all obligations (timely order, coordination, notices), this delay is excusable and contractor may be entitled to an Extension of Time (EOT).
- If contractor failed in coordination or did not notify employer promptly, it could be deemed non‑excusable.