Most construction contracts do not give employers much control over contractors' work progress schedules. However, contracts commonly require contractors to submit work programs. These programs are not legally binding like the project specifications. They simply indicate how the contractor intends to schedule the work. If a contract does not include provisions for extending the completion deadline, employers can claim liquidated damages for delays. In one case, a contractor failed to complete work by the original deadline or an extended one, so the owner validly terminated the contract. Contracts also typically include clauses governing extensions of time for contractors. These clauses outline the process for requesting extensions and the events that would warrant granting more time, such as delays beyond a contractor's control.

1. Progress, Delay and
Completion
Lecture week 5/6

2. Progress
 Most contract provides the employer/ his
administrator with little control over
contractor’s work progress, as it is the
contractor’s obligation to finish on time-cl
21.1
 However, it is common for the contract to
include a requirement for the contractor to
submit the work programs to the employer-cl
3.5

3.  In any circumstances, the work program shall
not constitute as the contract document- cl.
3.6
Max W Abrahamson in Engineering Law and
ICE Contracts(1991):
‘ The programme, for example, is not a
contractual in the same sense as the
specification, since neither the contractor nor
the employer is bound by it. The programme
is what it is- a document indicating the
intention of the contractor at the time he
furnishes it as to how he intends to
progamme the works’.

4. Delay
 If there is no provision in the contract
relating to extension of contract’s
period, then if the contract is not
completed on time, the employer is
entitled for liquidated damages.

5. Chua Ngah Chin v Ng Kie En
The plf employed the def as the
contractors to build a terrace house in
Kuching, Sarawak.The contract has no
provision for extension of contract
period except for cl.6 of the contract
which stated:- if the building was not
completed within 15 months of the date
of the contract ‘raining days and public
holidays expressly excluded’, the owner
could revoke the contract.

6. The contractor later claimed for extension of
four months but still failed to complete the
work after the extension period. The plf gave
notice of termination and applied for removal
of def’s caveat of the land.
Held: The owner (plf) is entitled to revoke the
contract and removal of the caveat. The term
raining days was imprecise, but even if the
contractor had been allowed four months, as
he had claimed, he had still failed to
complete.

7.  In the absence of express provision on extension
of period of completion, the architect has no
power to extend the period.
Peak Construction (Liverpool) Ltd v McKinney
Foundations Ltd
Per Salmon LJ: ‘If the employer wishes to recover
liquidated damages for failure by the contractors,
to complete on time in spite of the fact that some
of the delay is due to the employer’s own fault, or
breach of contract, then the extension of time
clause should provide, expressly or by necessary
inference, for an extension on account of such a
fault or breach on the part of the employer.’

8. Extension of time (EoT)
 In the standard form of building
contract, there is a provision on rights of
the contractor to apply to extension of
the contract period-cl.23
 Rights and procedure: cl 23.1
 Right of employer via architect – cl 23.4
– Request for further document- cl 23.3
–Other Considerations-cl 23.5

9.  Even though, it is the contractual right
of the contractor to claim for EoT, the
contractor also has the obligation to
prevent any delay-cl.23.6

10. Events for EoT
 The architect in exercising his discretion
to grant Eot has to take into
consideration the relevant event for
EoT: cl.23.8 (a)-(x)
(These circumstances are known as
grounds for EoT)