Scholarly Papers
Oct 10, 2022

Evaluating Government Contracts for Delays, Delay Damages, and Levy of Compensation Provisions

Publication: Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Volume 15, Issue 1

Abstract

Management of delays is one of the critical issues in construction contract management. To fix responsibility and avoid disputes in construction projects, delays attributable to the client or contractor and those beyond the control of either party need to be appropriately identified and accounted for in the contract document. The present study critically examined construction contracts for different government organizations in India for various provisions concerning delays, delay damages, and levy of compensation; improvement measures are suggested. In this study, a mathematical framework for calculating the levy of compensation for delays attributable to the contractor, incorporating various relevant factors, was proposed. The findings were based on a detailed study of standard contract documents, manuals, and standard operating procedures for three government organizations—Central Public Works Department (CPWD), Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC), and National Highway Authority of India (NHAI)—and on subsequent interviews with senior construction professionals working in these organizations. The study found that existing contract provisions for calculating delay compensation are sometimes flawed and biased. Moreover, the prevalent methods for determining the levy of compensation do not consider many relevant factors, such as delays that occurred due to the client and total delay. The proposed framework can help construction practitioners calculate the compensation levy for delay damages in a fair and balanced manner.

Practical Applications

Delays in construction projects are a chronic issue worldwide. Different contract documents have specific provisions to deal with the delays, delay damages, and the levy of compensation. This study evaluated these provisions in the contract documents used by three large public sector Indian organizations. The fixed percentage–based approach to calculating the levy of compensation in standard contract documents fails to acknowledge many relevant delay factors attributable to different stakeholders and, consequently, often results in an unfair allocation of delay damages to contractors, leading to contractor financial problems, contract disputes with clients, and further project delays. The proposed framework for calculating the levy of compensation offers a rethinking of the scope and coverage of levy of compensation calculation clauses in standard construction contracts, which may protect the financial interests of different stakeholders and reduce conflicts and disputes. Practitioners can use the framework to appropriately account for different categories of delays and other relevant factors while determining the levy of compensation.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Data Availability Statement

All data, models, or code that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

Works Cited

Ahsan, K., and I. Gunawan. 2010. “Analysis of cost and schedule performance of international development projects.” Int. J. Project Manage. 28 (1): 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.03.005.
CPWD. 2019. Works manual 2019. New Delhi, India: Central Public Works Dept., Government of India.
CPWD. 2020. General condition of contract 2020 EPC projects. New Delhi, India: Central Public Works Department, Government of India.
DMRC. 2019. General condition of contract 2019. New Delhi, India: Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited.
Durdyev, S., and M. R. Hosseini. 2020. “Causes of delays on construction projects: A comprehensive list.” Int. J. Managing Projects Bus. 13 (1): 20–46. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-09-2018-0178.
Enshassi, A., J. Al-Najjar, and M. Kumaraswamy. 2009. “Delays and cost overruns in the construction projects in the Gaza strip.” J. Financ. Manage. Property Constr. 14 (2): 126–151. https://doi.org/10.1108/13664380910977592.
FIDIC. 2017. FIDIC Yellow Book - Conditions of contract for plant and design-build for electrical & mechanical plant, and for building and engineering works designed by the contractor. 2nd ed. London: Thomas Telford Ltd.
Głuszak, M., and A. Leśniak. 2015. “Construction delays in clients opinion—Multivariate statistical analysis.” Procedia Eng. 123 (Jan): 182–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.10.075.
González, P., V. González, M. Molenaar, and F. Orozo. 2014. “Analysis of causes of delay and time performance in construction projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 140 (1): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000721.
Hallowell, M. R., and J. A. Gambatese. 2010. “Qualitative research: Application of the Delphi method to CEM research.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 136 (1): 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000137.
Hansen, S. 2020. “Does the COVID-19 outbreak constitute a force majeure event? A pandemic impact on construction contracts.” J. Civ. Eng. Forum 6 (1): 201–214. https://doi.org/10.22146/jcef.54997.
Harris, E. C. 2012. Global construction disputes 2012: Moving in the right direction, 3–5. Amsterdam, Netherlands: EC Harris Contract Solutions and ARCADIS Construction Claims Consulting.
Hasan, A., and K. N. Jha. 2016. “Acceptance of the incentive/disincentive contracting strategy in developing construction markets: Empirical study from India.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 142 (2): 04015064. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001048.
Iyer, K. C., and K. N. Jha. 2006. “Critical factors affecting schedule performance: Evidence from Indian construction projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 132 (6): 871–881. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2006)132:8(871).
Kakar, A. S., A. Hasan, and K. N. Jha. 2020. “Schedule success factors in construction projects in a war-affected region.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 12 (3): 05020008. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000417.
Kamal, A., M. Abas, D. Khan, and R. W. Azfar. 2022. “Risk factors influencing the building projects in Pakistan: From perspective of contractors, clients and consultants.” Int. J. Constr. Manage. 22 (6): 1141–1157.
Kazaz, A., S. Ulubeyli, and N. A. Tuncbilekli. 2012. “Causes of delays in construction projects in Turkey.” J. Civ. Eng. Manage. 18 (3): 426–435. https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2012.698913.
Nagata, M. F., W. A. Manginelli, J. C. Lowe, and T. J. Trauner. 2018. Construction delays. 3rd ed. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
NHAI. 2022. Standard EPC agreement for national highways & centrally sponsored road works proposed to be implemented on engineering procurement & construction (EPC) mode of contract. New Delhi, India: Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (EAP section), Government of India.
Odeh, A. M., and H. T. Battaineh. 2002. “Causes of construction delay: Traditional contracts.” Int. J. Project Manage. 20 (1): 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(00)00037-5.
Salami, B. A., S. O. Battaineh, and A. S. Oyegoke. 2021. “Tackling the impacts of Covid-19 on construction projects: An exploration of contractual dispute avoidance measures adopted by construction firms.” Int. J. Constr. Manage. 1–9 https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2021.1963561.
Scott, S., R. A. Harris, and D. Greenwood. 2004. “Assessing the New United Kingdom protocol for dealing with delay and disruption.” J. Civ. Eng. Educ. 130 (1): 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2004)130:1(50).
Shehu, Z., I. R. Endut, and A. Akintoye. 2014. “Factors contributing to project time and hence cost overrun in the Malaysian construction industry.” J. Financ. Manage. Property Constr. 19 (1): 55–75 https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMPC-04-2013-0009.
Singh, S., S. Johari, A. Hasan, and K. N. Jha. 2022. “Risk factors in dedicated freight corridor and mass rapid-transit metro rail infrastructure projects.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 14 (2): 04521050. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000531.
Sun, M., and X. Meng. 2009. “Taxonomy for change causes and effects in construction projects.” Int. J. Project Manage. 27 (6): 560–572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.10.005.
Trauner, T., Jr., W. Manginelli, J. Lowe, M. Nagata, and B. Furniss. 2009. Construction delays: Understanding them clearly, analyzing them correctly. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier.
Tripathi, O. P., A. K. Jain, and K. N. Jha. 2022. “Evaluation of infrastructure project management system of government organizations and suggestion for their improvement.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 15 (1): 05022004. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000562.
Vu, H. A., V. H. Cu, L. X. Min, and J. Q. Wang. 2017. “Risk analysis of schedule delays in international highway projects in Vietnam using a structural equation model.” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage. 24 (6): 1018–1039. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-06-2016-0138.
Wang, T. K., D. N. Ford, H. Y. Chong, and W. Zhang. 2018. “Causes of delays in the construction phase of Chinese building projects.” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage. 25 (11): 1534–1551. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-10-2016-0227.
Yap, J. B. H., K. Shavarebi, and M. Skitmore. 2021. “Capturing and reusing knowledge: Analyzing the what, how and why for construction planning and control.” Prod. Plann. Control 32 (11): 875–888. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2020.1774676.
Yates, J. K., and A. Epstein. 2006. “Avoiding and minimizing construction delay claim disputes in relational contracting.” J. Civ. Eng. Educ. 132 (2): 168–179. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2006)132:2(168).

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Volume 15Issue 1February 2023

History

Received: Mar 13, 2022
Accepted: Aug 9, 2022
Published online: Oct 10, 2022
Published in print: Feb 1, 2023
Discussion open until: Mar 10, 2023

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

ASCE Technical Topics:

Authors

Affiliations

Additional Director General—Central Public Works Department (Government of India) and Ph.D. Candidate, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi 110016, India. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3810-7730. Email: [email protected]
Lecturer, School of Architecture and Built Environment, Faculty of Science, Engineering and Built Environment, Deakin Univ., Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia (corresponding author). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2031-4288. Email: [email protected]
Kumar Neeraj Jha, Ph.D. [email protected]
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi 110016, India. Email: [email protected]
Arvind Kumar Jain, Ph.D. [email protected]
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi 110016, India. Email: [email protected]

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

  • A Synthesis of Literature on the Effects of COVID-19 on Construction Industry, Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, 10.1061/PPSCFX.SCENG-1466, 29, 3, (2024).
  • Determining Delay Accountability, Compensation, and Price Variation Using Computable Smart Contracts in Construction, Journal of Management in Engineering, 10.1061/JMENEA.MEENG-5811, 40, 3, (2024).

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share