You are here:

Construction Law/About Delayed Payment / financing charges.


We recently received the Engineer's Determination on our
claim for financing charges under 14.8 [Delayed Payment] on
the delayed payment of the prolongation costs.
The Engineer said as a condition precedent for our entitlement
for such financing charge, we need to prove that it is actually
suffered as a loss.

As we consider the Delay Damage for the delayed completion of the Works, the Employer enjoys the benefit of setting certain percentage as a liquidated damages by putting the Contractor to
prove the sum specified is a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.While the liquidated damages under the sub-clause
8.3 is deemed as equivalent to financing charges for the Contract Price per day and the daily cost of the Employer's Personnel involved to supervise the execution of Works, I cannot understand why they get different treatment? Why the Employer does not have burden of proof that it really sustained such loss especially that it really spent such financing charges?

If we draft the delayed payment damage in a similar way as the delayed damage for the late completion such as by labelling the clause as "liquidated damages", then would this problem can be solved?

Dear K,

Normally, the Contractor has to justify claims for extra costs, but payment of financing charges under clause 14.8 is an absolute right without the need to claim.  The rate of interest is stated without any need to prove that it has actually been spent.  I suggest that your Engineer reads a copy of the FIDIC guide.  If you are claiming a higher rate than that given in clause 14.8, then you would have to prove the actual expenses.   

Incidentally, the size of delay damages has been questioned in several court cases and has been reduced where the judge thought that they were too high.  They are intended to cover not only financing charge or supervision costs but also the lost revenue or extra rental due to late completion.  

Construction Law

All Answers

Answers by Expert:

Ask Experts


Peter M. Elliott


First response to queries regarding extensions of time, variations orders, site instructions and payment using FIDIC and other forms of Conditions of Contract, based on English Law, and derivatives only. Anyone who needs advice about EoT should download and study the SCL Delay & Disruption Protocol before submitting a question.


Value . . .
It's unwise to pay too much, but it's unwise to pay too little. When you pay too much you lose a little money, that is all. When you pay too little, you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you bought was incapable of doing the thing you bought it to do.
The common law of business balance prohibits paying a little and getting a lot. It can't be done. If you deal with the lowest bidder, it's well to add something for the risk you run.
And if you do that, you will have enough to pay for something better.
. . . John Ruskin (1819 - 1900)
"We are too poor to buy something cheap"
.Romanian Proverb 2002
A lean compromise is better than a fat lawsuit. George Herbert (English poet 1593-1633)
I said it in Hebrew, I said it in Dutch,
I said it in German and Greek:
But I wholly forgot (and it vexes me much)
That English is what you speak!" Hunting of the Snark - Lewis Caroll
Match your presentation to the reader!
The joy of food lasts but an hour, of sleep but a day, of a woman, but a month, but the joy of a building lasts a lifetime. Syrian proverb.
Comments and observations leading to improvements in the translation of FIDIC Red & Yellow books into Romanian prior to approval by FIDIC (reference 'Preface to the Romanian edition')

Institution of Civil Engineers, Association of Chartered and Certified Accountants, Society of Construction Law, Dispute Resolution Board Foundation

B Sc(Hons) in Civil Engineering

©2016 All rights reserved.