Construction Law/claim for delay in material supply
I ma working as a Contracts Engineer and dupted on a remeasure
Subcontract where multiple subcontract works are going on one of my Subcontractor is awarded for a part of the Contract on same Project for Building works now he insist any other works in that project is not applicable to his Subcontract as additional works and refuses the Site Instruction to carry out the works, but the works to be carried out are in the same site/Premises.
Is he has the rights to refuse to accept the additional works since his contract is for limited scope of work. Pleas advice me!
Thanks and regards
ANSWER: Dear Mohamad
It all depends on the subcontractor agreement. if such agreement is for limited scope of works and it does not provide for addition works condition, then such subcontractor has the right to refuse doing additional works at the same rate. this does not give the right to the subcontractor to refuse certain additional works which is considered essential to complete his original scope.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
QUESTION: Dear Sir,
Thanks for your worthful reply and guidance, I have come across with some another issue related with EOT in concurrent delays, Contractor has to supply IFC drawings by 16 April 2013 on mobilisation date as per schedule agreed, Contractor mobilised on same date but Contractor failed to supply the Drawings, now Subcontractor asking compensation for idle resources, but as per letter records it has observed that the Subcontractor delayed his site clearance and mobilisation by completing his works around July 2013. so as per Concurrent delays Subcontractor will be payable for Contractor delays less by Subcontractor Delays i.e. only one month since Subcontractor has delayed and completed his works by July 2013.
Please advise since Subcontractor asking for 3 months compensation attributing all delays to Contractor.
Thanks and regards
ANSWER: Dear Mohammed
I understood that the subcontractor was delayed due to his own action for some time and he was concurrently delayed due to the main contractor late submission of drawings. Then you would be right to consider that the subcontractor deserves only the difference between the 2 periods as EOT.
---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
QUESTION: We represent the Contractor and we have a disputed claim for delay in material supply from contractor side, Subcontractor submitted only some documents as evidence in which material delivery notes documented as support for its claim to accept the material delays from Contractor side.
I rejected the claim based on unsubstantiated proof since the claim is not supported on any base line programe of planning package such as Primavera -P3, etc. to show any delays on Project due to the material delays and also since some of the contractual clauses also I referred for rejecting the claim supporting to Contractor.
My question is that Can Contractor could refer two bases for rejecting the claim.
Second if suppose Subcontractor provided the sufficient substantiation for its claim even though the Contractual clauses will be based for rejecting the claim since the Subcontractor is threatening to approach to arbitration in case if we not accepting its claim.
And the last shall Contractor has to guide the Subcontractor to produce the right documents since he has asked frequently to guide what document is required to substantiate its claim, as we rejected its claim based on unsubstantiated proof of documents from Subcontractor side.
Please advise me.
Thanks and regards
It Is accepted to reject the claim for one or more reasons. But should you reject such claim because it is not supported by the baseline program analysis, such as P3. the answer will depend on the contract if such P3 is required and identified as the only source of delay analysis.
After rejecting certain documentation it would be logical to inform the subcontractor what documents are required so that his claim can be studied.