Scribd
Upload
116 views4 pages

Digging Deeper and Untangling Quantum and Delay Claims

The document discusses approaches to constructing quantum and delay claims. It notes that claimants commonly rely on inference rather than causation in "global" or "total cost" claims. The document recommends untangling claims by separating arguments, variations, and delay claims. It advises digging deeper into contract details like scope and specifications to identify causation rather than making inferential arguments. Experts should investigate the program baseline and variations to determine delay impacts and costs. This untangling approach builds a stronger case compared to "global" claims relying on inference alone.

Uploaded by

patrick
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
116 views4 pages

Digging Deeper and Untangling Quantum and Delay Claims

The document discusses approaches to constructing quantum and delay claims. It notes that claimants commonly rely on inference rather than causation in "global" or "total cost" claims. The document recommends untangling claims by separating arguments, variations, and delay claims. It advises digging deeper into contract details like scope and specifications to identify causation rather than making inferential arguments. Experts should investigate the program baseline and variations to determine delay impacts and costs. This untangling approach builds a stronger case compared to "global" claims relying on inference alone.

Uploaded by

patrick
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Digging Deeper and

Untangling Quantum
& Delay Claims

accuraconsulting.com
When drafting a quantum and /or delay claim based on several events,
claimants commonly use inference rather than causation to build their
arguments. This approach is sometimes used by claimants as they tend to
focus on the monetary amounts lost and/or the delays they have incurred,
rather than identifying causation.

These types of claims can be known as The above list is in no way exhaustive but does
“Global” or “Total Cost Claims”. Global claims provide high-level guidance from a pragmatic
are where the claimant does not provide and logical point of view. If a claimant cannot
evidence to prove a causal link between its meet all the points listed above; a global claim
losses and the actions of the respondent. The will generally fail.
claimant puts forward a collection of events
and a total amount of loss (monetary and time) Often a claim submitted as “global” does not
incurred and argues that the events in their meet the general requirements outlined
totality have caused the loss. previously and is not deemed a global claim
but an ambit, lazy, or just a "bad claim". There
Global claims are allowed so long as several are occasions from a strategic point of view
prerequisites are met, such as: where a claimant may put together such a
claim. The claimant may choose to submit a
• All preconditions for making a claim set out such a claim due to either lack of time,
in the contract must be satisfied. information, or ability. In most case the
respondent easily rebuts these types of claims.
• Sufficient particulars to enable the
respondent to identify the case against it.
To avoid rebuttals and achieve success,
• Where there are matters that the respondent claims need to be untangled, and you need
is not responsible for that are significant to to dig deeper to identify the causation.
the delay claimed, these must be accounted
for in the claim (CONCURRENCY).

• Any part of the claim capable of separation


and for which a causative link can be
identified should not form part of the global
claim.

• As a matter of course, the claimant must


provide sufficient evidence to support the
losses claimed. Digging Deeper and Untangling Quantum & Delay Claims

1
Untangling
the Claims
The first step in building a claim is to separate the arguments (identify
the heads of claim) and then split the variation and delay claims. The
variations should be investigated first with the right to claim under the
contract defined, and the quantum broke down.

At this stage, only entitlement under the design inputs from the respondent) that
contract should be discussed. The are not deemed as variations can be
investigation is not limited to the general, included in the delay analysis.
or special conditions and a focus on the
scope, specifications and the drawings is When all the respondent culpable delay
required. events are identified, any concurrent
claimant events should be demonstrated
Whilst a quantum expert is working on in the delay analysis.
the variations; a delay expert should be
investigating and auditing the baseline The final part of the claim is the quantum
program and the monthly updated expert needs to determine the delay
programs. The baseline programs logic costs, which in most cases will be indirect
links, leads, lags and milestones need to costs such as insurances, site
be forensically analysed to ensure they accommodation, project management
are correct and where applicable errors staff, bonds etc.
fixed and recorded.
Digging Deeper and Untangling Quantum & Delay Claims

There may be direct costs incurred that


Once an error-free baseline is available, a are not included in the variations. If this is
delay analysis can take place using an the case, they should be identified within
appropriate method. the specific window of time the delay
occurred.
The benefit of investigating and
demonstrating the variations first is that Once a quantum and delay expert
the quantum (cost) can be separately untangle the heads of claims, lawyers can
identified from the delay costs. The introduce legal arguments, prepare
variations may also provide causation for witness statements, and prepare the
a delay claim. statement of claim.

Once any variations are determined as The experts should write in plain English
contributing delay events, other delaying and avoid where possible verbose
events (such as site access and lack of sentences.

2
Digging
Deeper

To build good foundations, it is generally considered you need to “dig


deeper” to find solid ground. The same can be said when constructing
arguments around causation and avoiding inference.

Accura Consulting does not get involved compare them to the as built or current
in the legal arguments and leaves that matters in dispute. We then put forward
aspect of a claim to the legal experts. reasoned technical arguments based on
What we do is dig deeper into the whole facts and evidence.
contract and forensically assess the
scope of work, the specification and the Our team stick to what we are good at
drawings. and create robust, technical, and factual
arguments which produce precise
We will untangle the rights and quantum and delay claims.
obligations of each party, and pay
attention to matters concerning
deliverables, battery limits and scope etc.

We consider the defined terms within


the contract and how specifically defined
terms can provide clarity on aspects of
the scope and specification which on the
face of it appears unclear. Digging Deeper and Untangling Quantum & Delay Claims

We don’t stop there; we dig deeper to Paul McArd • Managing Director


understand the technical requirements e: [email protected]
detailed within the contract and t: +61 3 9094 7980

Download our Capability Statement


accuraconsulting.com/capabilitystatement

Learn more about us


accuraconsulting.com linkedin.com/company/accuraconsulting

Disclaimer: This paper does not in any way constitute any type of legal or professional advice 3
whatsoever and in no way should be relied upon by any party whatsoever in any jurisdiction.

You might also like