Answer Happy

Scenario of Contractual Claim You are a contractor who has been
appointed to carry out the construction of a new section of the N16
National Primary Road between Sligo and Manorhamilton
(approximately 3km of works) between the townlands of
Drumkilsellagh and Lugnagall . The contract involves the
following:
• Circa 2.54km of realignment to the existing N16 National
Primary Route (c. 0.79km online and c. 1.75km offline);
• Junction Improvements including: o One At Grade Roundabout; o
Six Simple T Junctions, including two Right/Left Staggered T
Junctions;
• Circa 1.5km of realignment to the existing local road network
(tie-in works);
• Three Direct Access connections to the National Primary
network;
• Circa 1.5km of Vulnerable Road Users (Unsegregated cycle and
pedestrian) tracks located predominately with the mainline verge
space, interlinking as necessary with alternative offline
routes;
• One Vulnerable Road Users Subway underpass;
• One River/Stream Clear Span Structure;
• Culverts and associated diversions of existing minor
watercourses and drainage ditches;
• All the necessary drainage works associated with the Proposed
Road Development;
• The diversion of services and utilities; • Earthworks
operations;
• One no. steepened cut side slope in the townland of
Lugatober;
• One no. Soil Repository/Borrow Pit; • Environmental mitigation
works;
• The other consequential construction works necessary in order
to complete the project.
The ground conditions have been identified in a geotechnical
report supplied by the employer, which have been provided to you,
without interpretation. The works are being constructed under the
Public Works Contract PW-CF3, for Civil works designed by the
Employer. The programme contingencies have been identified in the
contract as T1 = 20 Working Days, T2=20 Working Days The works were
due to start on the 1/1/2021, however due to a number of issues
with residents, the contract did not get started until 8 weeks
later. Overlapping this problem, the works were suspended due to
the Covid 19 pandemic. Construction works were allowed to begin
again on 8/3/2021 This delay suited you, as you had a significant
amount of other work in the completion phase at that stage, and
allowed you to get plant and machinery mobilised for the works. It
also transpired that the employer had not completed all of the
specifications by the 1/1/2021, and therefore it would have been
impossible to start on site until the later date. The overall
programme of the works is due to take 104 weeks, and is due to be
completed by the 31/12/2023 Liquidated Damages have been set for
the whole of the project at €10,000 per week. Subsequent to
starting works on site on the 8/3/2021 a number of issues have
occurred. It transpires that the geotechnical report has a number
of significant inconsistencies contained in it that have caused
significant delay to you. The issues relate to rock that has been
located along the route that was not identified in the GR. The rock
hardness is 5-6 on the Mohr’s Hardness Scale, which will require
significantly larger rockbreakers to be used, which incurred a
greater cost of approximately 50% over what you have budgeted. The
hardness of the rock will has also lead to a slower pace of
breaking on a critical element – leading to a delay to the critical
path of 3 weeks. Some peat soils have also been identified in the
GR which the employer design has shown as being removed in its
entirety, and replaced by imported material. You have made a
proposal to alter the design to allow the peat to be left insitu
and for the road to be piled. This change has been proposed by you
as a value engineering proposal, however, in consultation with the
employer’s representative, you have indicated that there may be
extra cost involved, and that you will require specialist designers
for the work. There will also be a longer lead in time. This
overall change will lead to a 4 week delay to the programme. During
the works an archaeological site of national importance is
identified. This had not been identified on any documentation, and
archaeology found in this way is designated as a Compensation Event
in Schedule 1K. The excavation and removal of the artefacts results
in a delay of 3 weeks. At the same time as the delay relating to
the burial mound, it transpires that some of the operatives on site
have not been paid in accordance with clause 5 of the contract.
These people are working for a domestic sub-contractor with whom
you have not worked before. This sub-contractor was brought into
the work because of your own lack of labour. The sub contractor’s
workers have gone on strike, causing other workers to refuse to
pass the picket. The standoff between the sub-contractor and his
staff lasts for 5 working days. Eventually they all go back to
work, however, you have reminded the sub-contractor of his
responsibility under his sub contract. The employer has asked for
extra entrances to be accommodated in the works, causing disruption
to the schedule of the works. Unmarked services are located during
some of these extra works. Working around these services has led to
significant disruption in the progress of the works. The original
programme had shown this section of the work to be complete within
a 16 week period, however during the progress of the works, it has
become obvious that the rate of progress is 80% of what was
originally programmed. There was a watermain to be relaid alongside
the new road, which the original design required approximately 200
slight bends, including thrust blocks to be installed. Your
estimator at tender stage identified this as a possible saving. By
using Medium Density Polyethelne pipe, it was possible to avoid the
installation of the bends and thrust blocks by pulling the pipe
through the trench without any difficulty. The ER has accepted that
this will meet the employers requirements and has also agreed that
the change will improve the integrity of the pipeline. Subsequently
the employer initiated an employers claim against you under Clause
10.9 of the contract in order to reduce the contract sum, as you
have managed to save the cost of the installation of the pipe
fittings and thrust blocks. The Health and Safety Authority has
also visited the site, and, subsequent to an accident, where a
trench in which a man had been working a few minutes earlier
collapsed. This resulted in a prohibition notice for part of the
works, until a safe system of work is instituted that protects any
worker in that situation. This has led to a delay of 5 working
days, to a critical item on the programme. You are required to
write the overall contract claim for the delays to the works as
outlined. You may use fictitious personnel, and occurrences to
further flesh out your claim. Please submit your claim, as if you
were the contractor. Please submit a programme (Gantt Chart or
similar) for the works with your claim, outlining the original
programme, and the disrupted programme. You may also wish to show
particular interventions from the employer that has caused the
delays you have encountered. At the end of the claim document,
please submit a separate conclusion, including a comparison of how
differently the claims could have been dealt with under other forms
of contract. This overall project should probably contain 3000 –
3500 words, however there will be no penalty for going over this
suggested amount. The Structure of Contractual claims are not set
in stone, however some standard presentations have become best
practice over the years. The following are suggestions as to what
might be included 1. Title page 2. Table of Contents – with
pagination 3. Executive Summary 4. Table of Causations 5.
Chronology of the events – include items of Fact, Contract Clause
leading to Entitlement, Notices – when they have been issued, and
Quantum (both time and money) – this could also include
correspondence from each of the fictitious parties on site at the
time. 6. Appendices See ‘Contractual Claims’ Section of the Moodle
Page for further guidance