Investigation of the Reasonable Time Computation under Time-at-Large Construction Schedule Disputes

Abstract

Construction disputes, stemming from time extension claims, are not uncommon. Such disputes present a specifically challenging dimension when contractors call time on the project to have become at large. More complications further emerge as a result of the parties’ conflicting expectations with respect to who has the burden of proving whether the works have been completed within what can be deemed as a reasonable time and the approach for determining such time. The objective of this paper was to address the factors, conditions, and approaches that contribute to the determination of reasonable time. The adopted methodology involved a review of relevant literature and case law as well as an investigation of standard requirements pertaining to schedule administration and recommended practices related to forensic schedule analyses. The research outcomes included deriving a practicable understanding of the circumstances governing the reasonableness of time taken to complete the works, deducing the proper rationale for pinpointing the responsibility for making the reasonable time determination, and constructing a theoretical model for systematically approaching the reasonable time computation. Finally, the usefulness of the developed model was tested using the full records of two time-at-large disputes encountered on recently completed building construction projects.