i-law

International Construction Law Review

CONCURRENT DELAY IN CONSTRUCTION – PRINCIPLES AND CHALLENGES

FRANCO MASTRANDREA

LLB (Hons), MSc, PhD, FRICS, FCIArb, Barrister at Law

INTRODUCTION

Concurrent delay on construction projects, i.e. where delay results from two or more causes – such as matters for which each contracting party is separately and independently responsible, each sufficient to explain the delay – continues to provoke debate and comment, particularly in the UK, suggesting that all is not well with this area of law and practice. This appears to be due to a combination of factors, including the search for an adequate definition of concurrent delay, the consequences of adopting particular contractual provisions, the application of such provisions, and the principles and methodologies used to determine entitlements to further time or money.
Lawyers have traditionally searched for the causes of construction delays by reference to the general law’s standard approach to causation, i.e. through the use of a counter-factual analysis (the but-for test).
However, because the but-for test breaks down in cases of damage resulting from independently sufficient causes, lawyers have been obliged to devise alternative means of locating the relevant causes in those circumstances. Recent academic literature on concurrent causes has garnered broad support, particularly that surrounding Wright’s “NESS” condition (being a necessary element of a set of conditions sufficient for the consequence1). The nature, relevance and application of such conditions to the identification of causes of concurrent delay are explored.
Beyond the strictly causal enquiry, the questions whether liability should attach2 and, if so, its extent are increasingly raised. This includes, notably, calls for improved protection for defendants. That pressure has led to changes in the law of tort, such as in Australia as the introduction of proportionate liability models. Even contract – where an “all-or-nothing” strict liability regime has had significant traditional sway – has not escaped scrutiny. This has extended to calls for the efficacy of events more


The International Construction Law Review [2014

84

The rest of this document is only available to i-law.com online subscribers.

If you are already a subscriber, click Log In button.

Copyright © 2024 Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited. Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited is registered in England and Wales with company number 13831625 and address 5th Floor, 10 St Bride Street, London, EC4A 4AD, United Kingdom. Lloyd's List Intelligence is a trading name of Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited.

Lloyd's is the registered trademark of the Society Incorporated by the Lloyd's Act 1871 by the name of Lloyd's.