If a compensation event causes a delay of 30 days to a section of work and a specific piece of equipment ( jack up barge) was required for a delayed task, the Contractor claims the costs for the equipment (jack up barge) during that period.
If however, the original submission showed that an alternative piece of equipment was going to be used for the delayed task, should we assume that the piece of equipment ( jack up barge) was not required to provide the works, and no delay costs are associated with it, even when the Contractor has changed their approach but did not notify their change in approach
Should the assessment be made based on what was known at the time of the CE and the information was available, ie the delayed task did not require the jack up barge? Or based on the contractors revised approach which they did not communicate?