Delays and Disruptions Provisions



Disputes in construction are expensive, lengthy and can fatigue parties due to their exhaustive nature. The disputes that arise from a project relate to the uncertainty and risks carried by the parties. Ultimately, these risks and uncertainty should be minimised so each party can achieve its objectives. Clients want the projects to be completed as soon as they can while contractors are seeking profits. In order to identify the nature of claims generally and their characteristics, the author in this chapter will articulate the disputes that can arise in projects due to delays and disruptions, the essence of these disputes such as time of essence, extension of time, completion issues and acceleration incurred or to be claimed for reimbursement. Concurrency, apportionment and time at large are special provisions that are frequently encountered in disputed contracts are also dealt with. Global claims are delay and disruption claims disguised as the causal nexus is not defined, and therefore a claimant must be aware of all the issues presented in this chapter before embarking on understanding and presenting his claim globally.


Critical Path Reasonable Time Relevant Event Completion Date Compensable Delay 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Case Law

  1. Amalgamated Building Contractors Ltd. v Waltham Holy Cross UDC (1952) 2 All ER 452 CAGoogle Scholar
  2. Ascon Contracting Limited v Alfred McAlpine Construction Isle of Man Limited (1999) Con LR 119Google Scholar
  3. Balfour Building Ltd. v Chestermount Properties Ltd. (1993) 62 BLR 1 QBDGoogle Scholar
  4. Balfour Beatty Construction Limited v The Mayor and Burgess of the London Borough of Lambeth (2002) 1 BLR 288Google Scholar
  5. British Steel Corporation v Cleveland Bridge & Engineering Co. (1981) 24BLR100Google Scholar
  6. City Inn v Shepherd Construction Ltd. (2007) CSOH 190Google Scholar
  7. City Inn v Shepherd Construction Ltd. (2010) CSIH 68 CA 101/00Google Scholar
  8. Emson Eastern Ltd. v E.M.E. Development Ltd. (1991) 55 BLR114Google Scholar
  9. Fortec Constructors v United States 8 Cl. Ct. 490 (1985)Google Scholar
  10. Gaymark Investments Pty Limited v Walter Construction Group Limited (1999) NTSC 143Google Scholar
  11. Great Eastern Hotel Company Ltd. v John Laing Construction Ltd. TCC (2005) All ER 368Google Scholar
  12. H Fairweather and Co. Ltd. v London Borough of Wandsworth (1987) 38 BLR 106Google Scholar
  13. Henry Boot Construction (UK) Ltd. v Malmaison Hotel (Manchester) Ltd. (2000) CILL 1572 TCCGoogle Scholar
  14. HW Neville (Sunblest Ltd.) v William Press & Son Ltd. (1981) 20 BLR 78Google Scholar
  15. J. Jarvis and Sons v Westminster Corporation (1969) 1 WLR 1448 CAGoogle Scholar
  16. John Barker Construction Limited v London Portman Hotel Limited (1996) 83 BLR 31Google Scholar
  17. John Doyle Construction v Laing Management (Scotland) (2004) 1 BLR 295Google Scholar
  18. John Driggs Company, Inc., ENGBCA No. 4926, 87-2-BCA 19,833Google Scholar
  19. Motherwell Bridge Construction Ltd (T/A Motherwell Storage Tanks) v (1) Micafil Vakkuumtechnik Ag (2) Micafil (2002) 8 Con LR 44Google Scholar
  20. Mount Charlotte Investments Ltd. v Westbourne Building Society (1976) 1 All ER 890Google Scholar
  21. Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd. v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd (2007) BLR 195 TCCGoogle Scholar
  22. Natkin & Co v George A. Fuller Co 347 F. Supp. 17 (W.D. Mo. 1972)Google Scholar
  23. Neodox Limited v The Borough of Swinton and Pendlebury (1958) 5 BLR 38Google Scholar
  24. Peak Construction (Liverpool) Ltd v McKinney Foundations Ltd (1970) 1 BLR 111Google Scholar
  25. Raineri v Miles (1980) 2 WLR 847Google Scholar
  26. Tan Ah Kian v Haji Hasnan (1962) MLJ 400Google Scholar
  27. The Royal Brompton Hospital v Hammond & Others (No. 7) (2001) 76 Con L.R. 148Google Scholar
  28. Wells v Army & Navy Cooperative Society (1902) 86 LT 764Google Scholar


  1. Ansley R, Kelleher T, Lehman A (2009) Smith, currie and hancock’s common sense construction law: a practical guide for the construction professional. Wiley, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. Beale H, Bishop W, Furmston M (2008) Contract: cases and materials. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Bockrath J, Plotnick F (2010) Contracts and the legal environment for engineers and architects. McGraw-Hill, USAGoogle Scholar
  4. Carnell N (2005) Causation and delay in construction disputes. Blackwell Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. Delay and Disruption Protocol (2002). Society of Construction Law, UKGoogle Scholar
  6. Eggleston B (2008) Liquidated damages and extensions of time: in construction contracts. Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  7. Hinze J (2000) Construction contracts. McGraw-Hill, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  8. Pickavance K (2010) Delay and disruption in construction contracts. Sweet and Maxwell, UKGoogle Scholar
  9. Ramsey V, Furst S (2008) Keating on building contracts. Sweet and Maxwell, UKGoogle Scholar
  10. Reese C (2010) Hudson’s building and engineering contracts. Sweet and Maxwell, UKGoogle Scholar
  11. Wallace D (1995) Hudson’s building and engineering contract. Sweet and Maxwell, UKGoogle Scholar
  12. Wickwire J, Driscoll T, Hurlbut S, Groff M (2010) Construction scheduling: preparation, liability, and claims. Aspen Publishers, MarylandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited  2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dar Al RiyadhRiyadhSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations