Skip to main content

Evaluating Disruption Costs on Major Construction Projects

Paper number
D125

Christopher Ennis

July 2011

A paper based on talks given at the Technology and Construction Bar Associations' Annual Conference in London on 29th January 2011 and a meeting of the Society of Construction Law in Sheffield on 22nd March 2011

Christopher Ennis paper is about the quantity surveying issues raised by disruption claims, and thus is concerned with quantum not time analysis, looked at from the point of view of a quantum expert rather than a lawyer. It considers the many practical and theoretical problems in dealing, from an opponent's and tribunal's point of view, with a claim from a contractor for costs allegedly attributable to disruption. First, it defines disruption, explains why such claims are often problematic and distinguishes them from other categories of claim. It goes on to discuss the possible methods of evaluating such a claim and the sorts of records which ought to be available in order to substantiate it.

Introduction and context - What is disruption, and why is evaluation of disruption costs problematic? - How not to measure disruption - How should disruption be measured? - How disruption can be measured: practical issues - Particular contractual issues - Conclusions.

Christopher Ennis MSc FRICS FCIArb is Director, Legal Support, Davis Langdon, an AECOM Company.

Text 25 pages.