Global Claims for Delay and Disruption: Causations and Apportionment
There is no strict method to prove causation. Whilst it is seen as the best approach, the courts do not always demand that loss is demonstrated on a cause-by-cause basis and this is often not even an option. In this article, we discuss demonstrating causation by inference and whether apportioning loss is an option.
It is sometimes not possible, and certainly less convenient, for a contractor to particularise its assessment of a claim for an extension of time and/or for the recovery of additional costs due to delay/disruption. As a result, a contractor may decide to claim the net difference between actual and planned costs and allege that the difference was caused by the cumulative effect of events for which the employer is liable.
Are global claims permissible?
A court will not deny a claim for damages on the grounds that it is difficult to establish the exact amount. However, a contractor will have to establish how the loss was caused. Although calculating the amount of damages may be a difficult task, it is not one that impedes a claim. The real problem for the claimant contractor is demonstrating the causal link between an event and its related losses.