索赔与争议管理

The client just instructed us to stop work on the admin building because they want to change the layout. That's a suspension under Clause 8.8. We need to protect our position immediately.

Agreed. I'll issue a formal notice of claim within the next 2 hours. Under Sub-Clause 20.1, we have 28 days, but the sooner the better. I'll state that the suspension constitutes a compensation event entitling us to both EOT and cost. Meanwhile, your team needs to start capturing contemporaneous records from this moment.

What specific records do you need?

Every day of the suspension: workforce and equipment standby logs — names, hours, equipment IDs. Photos showing the site condition — idle equipment, empty work fronts. Daily diary entries recording the suspension. All correspondence with the client about the layout changes. And importantly, a narrative timeline showing what work was planned for each day of the suspension. The quality of our records determines the quality of our claim.

Understood. I'll assign one of my engineers full-time to document this. I'll also notify our subcontractors to submit their own standby costs so we can flow those through. What's our estimated quantum at this point?

For a 2-week suspension, roughly USD 60,000 to 80,000 in standby costs plus the schedule slip. Let's get the notice out first, then quantify. The worst thing we can do is miss a contractual time bar.

DAAB Chairman (DAAB主席 DC)

Good morning. This Dispute Avoidance and Adjudication Board hearing concerns the contractor's claim for additional costs due to unforeseeable ground conditions at the turbine foundation. The DAAB has reviewed the written submissions from both parties. We'll now hear opening statements — contractor first, 30 minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The contract's geotechnical baseline report, Appendix G, indicated stiff clay to 8 meters depth. In reality, during excavation we encountered weathered rock from 3.5 meters — a condition that was not reasonably foreseeable by an experienced contractor at tender stage. We have three independent geotechnical assessments confirming this was a physical condition that differs materially from the contract data. The additional cost claimed is USD 1.38 million, comprising rock breaking, extended excavation duration, and concrete overbreak.

Mr. Chairman, we dispute this on two grounds. First, the boreholes used in the baseline report were at 50-meter spacing. Our specification clearly states that intermediate conditions may vary. Second, the contractor's method statement proposed a rock breaker as a contingency — so they clearly anticipated the possibility of rock. The cost should be within their contingency allowance.

We've heard both parties. The DAAB will issue its recommendation within 14 days. However, I would encourage the parties to consider a commercial settlement during that period. From what we've heard, there are strengths and weaknesses on both sides. A negotiated outcome may serve both parties' long-term interests better than a board decision.