NEC3 Option A - Delay


Please can I ask your view of the below.

We the Subcontractor had encountered a Contractor risk which caused a Delay to our programme which is Accepted. We raised a Compensation event within the time scales allowed as this impacted a Sectional Completion Date

4 months have passed, and we await response to that NCE which the Contractor has requested time to review. Around 2 months after raising the NCE above, we the Subcontractor have caused a delay to the Contractor which impacts the same Sectional Completion date.

The Contractor is now claiming that because our delay is the prominent delay, I.e stops us completing the Sectional Completion Date, we are not entitled to cost or time and liable to LD’s

My question is, should delays be assessed in the sequence they occur, ignoring any knowledge of delays we the Subcontractor we’re not aware at the time of raising the NCE (Dividing Date).

It feels the Contractor has intentionally prolonged their response to pass the responsibility for the delay to the Subcontractor.

My position is that the NCE must be assessed for the first delay which would move S/C dates + cost, any delay caused by the Subcontractor thereafter would be dealt with via LD’s.

Note - Our right to force a response was changed via z clause.

Thank you for your help in advanced.

1 Like

I’m eager to see responses from others on this however I’m inclined to agree with you. I’ve never felt comfortable with the idea of concurrency on NEC contracts and it’s much simpler to treat events in the sequence they occur.

There is no concurrency on NEC Contracts. You might like to have a read of this article from @Glenn_Hide on this exact topic:

1 Like