How Legatech Secured a €5.5 Million Award
In large-scale EPC projects, especially those involving multiple contractors and phases, untangling delay responsibilities can be challenging. Legatech recently tackled a complex construction dispute in the Middle East, where our client a construction contractor handled Section C of an EPC contract while a separate contractor managed the Engineering and Procurement (E&P) phases. This case showcases how thorough delay analysis and strategic legal advocacy can dramatically change the outcome of a dispute.
The Core Issue: Delays and Overruns in Section C
Despite having responsibility only for the Construction phase, our client faced claims from the refinery owner alleging:
- Project overruns attributable to Section C delays
- Additional costs incurred as a result
The critical question was whether these delays originated from the Construction phase itself or were largely influenced by E&P setbacks.
Legatech’s Approach: Combining Critical Path and Pacing Delay Analyses
To determine who owned the delay, Legatech:
- Reviewed Contract & Documents
- Studied the original contract, project schedules, and communications between all parties
- Identified specific contractual provisions dictating responsibilities for each phase
- Critical Path Analysis
- Mapped out the project timeline to highlight dependencies between the Construction and E&P phases
- Demonstrated that E&P delays directly pushed back the start and completion of Section C
- Pacing Delay Analysis
- Showed that our client revised schedules to accommodate E&P setbacks
- Proved the contractor’s efforts to minimize the overall impact, reducing liability for added delays
By pinpointing external factors responsible for pushing back Section C, Legatech effectively shifted the liability away from our client, reinforcing that much of the delay was beyond their control.
The Legal Outcome: From €1.5 Million to €5.5 Million
Initially, the court awarded €1.5 million to our client. However, Legatech appealed the ruling, presenting additional evidence of E&P-induced delays. The court of appeals recognized:
- The significant impact of E&P setbacks
- Our client’s proactive steps to mitigate further delay
As a result, the award was increased to €5.5 million, aligning with the factual evidence of unforeseen external delays and underscoring our client’s limited scope of responsibility.
Key Takeaways for Construction Disputes
- Clearly Allocated Responsibilities
- Clear contractual terms help define which party is accountable when overlapping project phases experience delays.
- Detailed Delay Analysis
- Techniques like critical path and pacing analysis are crucial for determining the true source of project overruns.
- Appeals Can Change the Game
- Additional evidence and expert testimony often lead courts to revisit initial judgments sometimes with substantial financial impact.
Why Legatech?
This outcome reflects Legatech’s commitment to:
- Thorough contract interpretation
- Robust delay analysis
- Skilled legal advocacy in complex, multi-phase construction projects
From managing complex disputes to securing fair compensation, we help ensure that responsibility is accurately assigned—and that our clients’ interests remain protected. Whether you’re facing a high-stakes EPC claim or preparing for potential construction delays, our team has the expertise to guide you toward a successful resolution.