!The Challenge
A Gulf developer faced $85M in delay and disruption claims from an international contractor on a $1.2B mixed-use mega-project. The contractor alleged employer-caused delays under FIDIC Yellow Book Clause 8.4 and 8.5, claiming Extension of Time (EOT) and prolongation costs across 14 separate delay events. The project had complex interdependencies between three work packages with overlapping critical paths.
⚙Our Approach
GSDA assembled a claims team combining construction lawyers, quantum experts, and delay analysts. We conducted a forensic schedule analysis using Time Impact Analysis (TIA) methodology, demonstrating that 9 of the 14 alleged delay events were either concurrent (contractor risk) or arose from the contractor's own re-sequencing decisions. We prepared a detailed counter-narrative showing that the contractor's claimed critical path was reconstructed retrospectively and did not match contemporaneous progress records.
✓The Outcome
At ICC arbitration, the tribunal awarded the contractor $18.7M — a 78% reduction from the claimed $85M. The tribunal adopted our TIA analysis in full and specifically noted the contractor's failure to maintain contemporaneous schedule updates as undermining their delay narrative.
Key Takeaways
- 1Contemporaneous schedule records are the decisive factor in FIDIC delay disputes
- 2Time Impact Analysis methodology is preferred by ICC tribunals over as-planned vs as-built comparisons
- 3Forensic deconstruction of concurrent delays can dramatically reduce claim exposure