Time at large: implication for liquidated damages

Abstract

“Time at large” is a term used to indicate that the duty to complete the works by particular time is lost. In the event of late completion, the Contractor may use “time at large” to avoid paying liquidated damages. The Contractor may argue that the duration of the contract was never established or delay was caused by Employer’s default. Thus, preventing Employer from enforcing the right to liquidated damages. However, the interpretation of "time at large" is not that straightforward as there were different or various interpretations of the term. The basic principle of “time at large” suggests the Contractor, in fact, is given time to fulfil his obligations rather than a specific duration to complete the works. Therefore, the principle needs to clarify further specifically in relation to liquidated damages. This research is conducted to determine the circumstances for which “time at large” may be validly acceptable by the Courts in avoiding or mitigating the liquidated damages. The method applied for this research was legal research methodology. This research has been carried out based on cases that are related to “time at large” and liquidated damages. The law cases were reported in Malayan Law Journal (MLJ) which was retrieved from Online Database LexisNexis. In achieving the objective of this research, seven cases have been chosen to be analyzed. Based on the finding of the analysis, there are a few number of circumstances at which “time at large” may be validly acceptable by the Courts in avoiding or mitigating the liquidated damages. Those circumstances are additional variations or extra works, late site possession, delay and disruption of the performance of works, failure to insist on strict compliance with the deadline of the contract, waiver and failure to grant an extension of time. The results show that the Contractor may use “time at large” to avoid or mitigate the imposition of liquidated damages claims from the Employer.