| contributor author | Steve Scott | |
| contributor author | Richard Anthony Harris | |
| contributor author | David Greenwood | |
| date accessioned | 2017-05-08T21:20:31Z | |
| date available | 2017-05-08T21:20:31Z | |
| date copyright | January 2004 | |
| date issued | 2004 | |
| identifier other | %28asce%291052-3928%282004%29130%3A1%2850%29.pdf | |
| identifier uri | http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/47678 | |
| description abstract | The recent publication of the U.K. Society of Construction Law’s protocol for dealing with delay claims has finally provided a good opportunity to make progress with a continuing difficulty that besets most substantial construction projects. The protocol makes recommendations on the issues that arise when delay claims must be managed. A report of recent research is conducted to test how U.K. professionals understand some of these issues and how they deal with them in practice. The conclusions show some areas of good agreement, notably in the way that early completion should be handled and the way that prolongation costs should be assessed. There are, however, areas that give rise to some concern. The methodology “time impact analysis” appears not to be well used in practice, and it also seems that contractors will have difficulty with the position taken on float ownership and concurrent delays. | |
| publisher | American Society of Civil Engineers | |
| title | Assessing the New United Kingdom Protocol for Dealing with Delay and Disruption | |
| type | Journal Paper | |
| journal volume | 130 | |
| journal issue | 1 | |
| journal title | Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice | |
| identifier doi | 10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2004)130:1(50) | |
| tree | Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice:;2004:;Volume ( 130 ):;issue: 001 | |
| contenttype | Fulltext | |