Contractual Claims · Dispute Resolution
Forensic Delay Analysis for Construction Claims: Methodologies & Legal Defence
When multi-million Rupee construction projects suffer extended completion delays, disputes inevitably erupt over who is responsible. Employers demand liquidated damages (LDs) for delayed commercial opening, while contractors seek prolongation costs for extended site overheads. Forensic delay analysis provides the scientific, evidence-based methodology required to resolve claims under FIDIC and Pakistan engineering contracts.
The Four Primary Forensic Delay Methodologies (SCL Protocol)
- 1. Time Impact Analysis (TIA): The internationally preferred prospective method. A quantified delay event fragnet (e.g. late client approval of structural drawings) is inserted into the latest updated CPM schedule immediately preceding the event to calculate its isolated critical-path impact.
- 2. Windows (Time-Slice) Analysis: The gold standard for retrospective dispute arbitration. The project timeline is sliced into monthly update windows. The schedule is evaluated at each window to track how the critical path dynamically shifted over time.
- 3. Collapsed As-Built (But-For) Analysis: Retrospectively removes employer delay events from the actual as-built schedule to demonstrate the date the contractor 'would have' finished but for the employer's interference.
- 4. As-Planned vs As-Built: A visual comparison between the original baseline and actual completion dates. Simple to prepare, but fails to account for dynamic critical-path changes or concurrent contractor delays.
The Challenge of Concurrent Delay
A concurrent delay occurs when an employer delay event (such as late access to the site) and a contractor delay event (such as slow mobilization of formwork labor) occur during the same time window. Under modern SCL Protocol guidelines, the contractor is entitled to time extension (relieving them of liquidated damages), but cannot recover prolongation financial costs.