Principle methods of assessing concurrent delays in construction

Abstract

One type of delay that often give rise to dispute is concurrent delay, where contractor delay occurs or has effect concurrently with employer delay. Concurrent delay makes the contractor claiming for extension of time and also possibly claiming for additional cost, while on the other hand the employer stand that the contractor has no right to get extension of time nor additional cost, but liquidated damages that shall be borne. In relation with delay in construction contract, it was clear that various events had occurred concurrently with one another, particularly towards the end of the project, which all potentially caused delays to completion. Some of these were relevant events under the construction contract, and some were events, which were attributable to party(ies) in default. The issue of concurrent delay has been considered at length by courts in various jurisdictions, it opened in somewhat inconsistencies principles in assessing the concurrent delay between one cases to the other. Apportionment methods is less considered under common law, while in particular case law, apportionment methods is in favour. Notwithstanding many interpretations from the court, the objectives of this study is to determine the principles that apply in assessing concurrent delay. The research is based on case laws analysis, particularly on what ground the judges prefer to use specific approach. After having cases analysis, several findings were resulted: the assessing methods differ from one jurisdiction to another; and a critical path method is recently widely used in the assessing concurrent delay, regardless the successful of the claim.