Delay and extension of time: the real issue in conflicts between time-bar provisions and prevention principle

This study looks at the real issue in the conflicts between time-bar provisions and prevention principle in construction contracts. Prevention principle normally refers to acts of prevention which prevent the contractor from completing on time which resulted in time to be “at large”. The employers i...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Mohd. Zin, Hamim
Format:	Thesis
Language:	English
Published:	2013
Subjects:	TH Building construction
Online Access:	http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/78150/1/HanimMohdZinMFAB20131.pdf
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

id	my-utm-ep.78150
record_format	uketd_dc
spelling	my-utm-ep.781502018-07-25T08:17:53Z Delay and extension of time: the real issue in conflicts between time-bar provisions and prevention principle 2013-12 Mohd. Zin, Hamim TH Building construction This study looks at the real issue in the conflicts between time-bar provisions and prevention principle in construction contracts. Prevention principle normally refers to acts of prevention which prevent the contractor from completing on time which resulted in time to be “at large”. The employers introduced conditions precedent or time-bar clauses to alert them to the contractors’ claims for delays and extension of time. However, prevention principle still presents a formidable barrier to the employers. It is not fair to the contractors because extension of time has not been granted and delay damages deducted merely because of the failure to give notice rather than for failure to progress with the works. This study was carried out mainly through documentary analysis of law cases reported in Lexis Nexis, construction law journals and articles. It does not cover concurrent delay. Case law on this point is divided. In an Australian case of Gaymark v Walter Construction the court decided in favor of prevention principle. In a more recent Scottish case of City In v Shepherd Construction the notice requirement as a condition precedent overrides the prevention principle. When the conflict finally tested in England in 2007 in the case of Multiplex v Honeywell, the judge doubted that Gaymark was correctly decided and represents the law of England. In another case of Steria Ltd v Sigma in the same year the English court arrived at the same conclusion that the prevention principle does not mean that failure to comply with time-bar provision put time at large if the contract provides for extension of time. The real issue is not so much on the conflicts between time-bar clauses and prevention principle but rather between such provisions and the doctrine of freedom of contract. Prevention principle is not a rule of law but merely a rule of construction and proximate causation analysis can exclude its operation if there is a properly drafted time-bar clauses. It is hoped that this study may help construction practitioners such as arbitrators and contract administrators in dealing with time-bar disputes at a preliminary stage with less time and cost. 2013-12 Thesis http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/78150/ http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/78150/1/HanimMohdZinMFAB20131.pdf application/pdf en public http://dms.library.utm.my:8080/vital/access/manager/Repository/vital:79557 masters Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Faculty of Built Environment Faculty of Built Environment
institution	Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
collection	UTM Institutional Repository
language	English
topic	TH Building construction
spellingShingle	TH Building construction Mohd. Zin, Hamim Delay and extension of time: the real issue in conflicts between time-bar provisions and prevention principle
description	This study looks at the real issue in the conflicts between time-bar provisions and prevention principle in construction contracts. Prevention principle normally refers to acts of prevention which prevent the contractor from completing on time which resulted in time to be “at large”. The employers introduced conditions precedent or time-bar clauses to alert them to the contractors’ claims for delays and extension of time. However, prevention principle still presents a formidable barrier to the employers. It is not fair to the contractors because extension of time has not been granted and delay damages deducted merely because of the failure to give notice rather than for failure to progress with the works. This study was carried out mainly through documentary analysis of law cases reported in Lexis Nexis, construction law journals and articles. It does not cover concurrent delay. Case law on this point is divided. In an Australian case of Gaymark v Walter Construction the court decided in favor of prevention principle. In a more recent Scottish case of City In v Shepherd Construction the notice requirement as a condition precedent overrides the prevention principle. When the conflict finally tested in England in 2007 in the case of Multiplex v Honeywell, the judge doubted that Gaymark was correctly decided and represents the law of England. In another case of Steria Ltd v Sigma in the same year the English court arrived at the same conclusion that the prevention principle does not mean that failure to comply with time-bar provision put time at large if the contract provides for extension of time. The real issue is not so much on the conflicts between time-bar clauses and prevention principle but rather between such provisions and the doctrine of freedom of contract. Prevention principle is not a rule of law but merely a rule of construction and proximate causation analysis can exclude its operation if there is a properly drafted time-bar clauses. It is hoped that this study may help construction practitioners such as arbitrators and contract administrators in dealing with time-bar disputes at a preliminary stage with less time and cost.
format	Thesis
qualification_level	Master's degree
author	Mohd. Zin, Hamim
author_facet	Mohd. Zin, Hamim
author_sort	Mohd. Zin, Hamim
title	Delay and extension of time: the real issue in conflicts between time-bar provisions and prevention principle
title_short	Delay and extension of time: the real issue in conflicts between time-bar provisions and prevention principle
title_full	Delay and extension of time: the real issue in conflicts between time-bar provisions and prevention principle
title_fullStr	Delay and extension of time: the real issue in conflicts between time-bar provisions and prevention principle
title_full_unstemmed	Delay and extension of time: the real issue in conflicts between time-bar provisions and prevention principle
title_sort	delay and extension of time: the real issue in conflicts between time-bar provisions and prevention principle
granting_institution	Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Faculty of Built Environment
granting_department	Faculty of Built Environment
publishDate	2013
url	http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/78150/1/HanimMohdZinMFAB20131.pdf
_version_	1747817919259082752

Delay and extension of time: the real issue in conflicts between time-bar provisions and prevention principle

Similar Items