| description abstract | Delays and disruptions that frequently lead to cost overruns on, and late completion of, construction projects are often accompanied by claims for time extensions and/or additional compensations by construction contractors. To this effect, contractors’ claims can become complex to an extent where it is difficult to relate losses incurred to individual events or causes and thereby establish grounds for putting forward global claims. The foundation of this category of claims is that multiple claim-causing events, for which the owner is responsible, have composite implications that render the determination of explicit individual cause-effect relations impossible or impracticable. As such, the aim of the work presented in this paper is to identify and synthesize the conditions that have contributed to making global construction claims more admissible and potentially successful or that have hindered their success. The adopted research methodology included (1) reviewing the literature regarding the main principles underlying global claims, (2) deducing the success and failure criteria for such claims through a case law review of 26 industry-reported cases spanning the last five decades, (3) developing a construct synthesizing the identified success and failure criteria and their interactions, and (4) pinpointing emergent trends that seem to be moderating the legal admissibility and success requirements of these claims. The findings revealed six criteria that can be viewed as contributing to the success of such claims, three of which mirror those found to be the basis for their failure. The emergent relaxation of requirements was found to be in relation to three of the identified success criteria, pertaining to (1) the contractor not unreasonably delaying the claim, (2) impracticability or impossibility to particularize, and (3) lack of the contractor’s responsibility for the added costs. | |
