Guild of Project Controls: Compendium | Roles | Assessment | Certifications | Membership

Tips on using this forum..

(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.

Delay in our own activity then further delay not caused by us

4 replies [Last post]
Ronn Chester Baluyot
User offline. Last seen 8 years 38 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 33

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.

Replies

Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 1 week 5 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4418

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

nathan whisson
User offline. Last seen 41 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 27 Mar 2012
Posts: 3
Groups: None

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...

Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 1 week 5 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4418

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

Pranab Kumar Deb
User offline. Last seen 2 years 42 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 291

Dear Ronn

My thought is that you would need to look at the updated schedule

  1. On the day you should have started the excavation for the PORTION of Superstructure works and see if there was any Float (A) to your part of the activities.
  2. Do an updated schedule on the Day you started excavation and see the current status of the Schedule, if there is any float (B)
  3. No of Days for the Redesign work (C)
  4. Ideally A-B+C should be your entitlement for extension of time.

However, Senior members maybe better placed to answer to your query.

 

Best regards

 

Pranab