Who Should Attend

• Claims Managers/Engineers/Officers

• Delay Analysts

• Contract Administrators / Managers

• Project Managers

• Quantity Surveyors

• Planners or Schedulers

• Site Engineers

• Architects

Course Outline

Analysis of complex construction delays and related claims and other contentious issues has been the subject of serious disputes and debate since many years. In this respect leading construction lawyers and delay experts from all around the world got together a few years back and agreed to prepare a Standard (or guideline) to facilitate the resolution of complex and intertwined construction delay issues. The task at hand was enormous and what evolved from this mammoth exercise is what is today known as the SCL Protocol (or Society of Construction Law’s Delay and Disruption Protocol) finalized in October 2002 after several years of serious and considerable debate and agreement between experts from different backgrounds.

Main Topics of the Seminar

• Analysis of complex construction delay issues has always been contentious

• In order to overcome and facilitate settlement of disputes, experts agreed on a standard called the SCL Protocol

• Objective was to bring reasonableness and fairness into the process and to eliminate widespread manipulation of complex issues

• The SCL Protocol tried to standardize the issues such that disputes would be reduced or eliminated

• Thousand of Construction Contracts are ongoing in the UAE and the Gulf. Contracts do not specifically define a standard system of dealing with contentious delay issues. This makes it even more imperative to adopt a standard

• It is suggested and recommended that the SCL Delay and Disruption Protocol should be adopted as a standard.

• Discussion of Key Principles of the SCL Protocol

Summary of the Seminar

The primary objective of producing the SCL Protocol was to achieve uniformity of approach and an endeavor to standardize the principles and guidelines associated with construction delay claims. A secondary objective was to eliminate widespread manipulation of complex issues by both experts and non-experts with reference to self-created and baseless principles.

Referral to case law from jurisdictions from around the world was further a cause for concern. The Protocol aimed to (and was able to considerably) reduce or eliminate references to case law references from complex and alien jurisdictions. The SCL Protocol tried to standardize the issues such that disputes would be reduced and eliminated.

Now there are thousands of Construction Contracts ongoing presently in the UAE and the Gulf. These contracts are being constructed by contractors and consultants from around the world and therefore experiences and familiarity with dozens of jurisdictions and guidelines for delay issues. Generally all the standard forms, or even the Contract specific Particular Conditions and Specifications, do not specifically define standard systems of dealing with contentious delay issues. Considering that delays are almost inevitable on all construction contracts, and specifically contracts which have been categorized as ‘fast-track’, contractors end up finishing late with respect of what has been agreed.

Time and costs go hand-in-hand and therefore when the projects get late, the contractors incur additional costs, which they naturally want to recover via the contract specific mechanism of claims. In this respect leading delay analysts and construction lawyers from around the world have been propagating the use and acceptance of the guidelines as defined by the SCL Protocol. This has been our focus since many years now and used effectively so as to reduce unnecessary and time-wasting discussions on complex delay analysis issues.

The objective of this seminar is to review the guidelines and principles suggested by the SCL Protocol and in doing so request the audience, who are no doubt all experts in their own fields, propagate the use of the SCL Protocol and its principles. This will ensure effective management of contentious issues in a timely manner and in doing so be proponents for effective dispute resolution.

The principles suggested by the Protocol are simple. Some of the key principles suggested by the Protocol are:

1. If there has been an Employer delay, which is beyond the Contractor’s control, he should be entitled to receive an extension of the Time, if this delay impacts the Completion of the Works. This will effectively result in an extended Time for Completion and will relieve the Contractor from having to pay penalties for delay (or Liquidated Damages under FIDIC).

2. For the case of recovery of delay (or prolongation) costs incurred due to the Employer delays, the Contractor must be able to prove that there has been no other delay, which is in his own control, which is equally (or partly) contributing for delaying the Time for Completion. This category of delay is called a ‘concurrent’ delay.

3. Results of (a) will not change and will remain independent of the results of (b). Each delay has its own merits and effects and must therefore be analyzed independently.