Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
employer delays
489
. That raises the possibility of a successful challenge
by a contractor that the architect's inability to extend time for employer
delays other than architect's instructions renders time at large whenever
such a delay becomes apparent. The fact that no such challenge has
appeared in the law reports probably says more for the low value of
work intended to be carried out under MW 98 than for the drafting of
the clause. It is another reason why MW 98 should never be used for
projects whose parameters are broader than set out in the guidance note.
(6) Although it is a basic principle of law that a party who is permitted to
sub-contract retains full responsibility for the performance of such sub-
contractors, the point has not been without doubt
490
. The last sentence of
this clause was inserted to clarify the position and the position has since
been upheld
491
.
(7) There is no provision for the architect to carry out any review of exten-
sions of time after the date of practical completion and it appears that,
unless the delay is ongoing almost to practical completion, he has no
general power to do so.
10.4 Extension of time position under WCD 98
10.4.1 Clause 25
The full text of clause 25 is as follows:
25 Extension of time
25.1
In clause 25 any reference to delay, notice or extension of time includes
further delay, further notice or further extension of time.
25.2
.1
If and whenever it becomes reasonably apparent that the progress of the
Works is being or is likely to be delayed the Contractor shall forthwith
give written notice to the Employer of the material circumstances in-
cluding the cause or causes of the delay and identify in such notice any
event which in his opinion is a Relevant Event.
25.2
.2
In respect of each and every Relevant Event identified in the notice given
in accordancewith clause 25.2.1 the Contractor shall, if practicable in such
notice, or otherwise in writing as soon as possible after such notice:
25.2
.2
.1 give particulars of the expected effects thereof; and
25.2
.2 .2 estimate the extent, if any, of the expected delay in the completion of
the Works beyond the Completion Date resulting therefrom
whether or not concurrently with delay resulting from any other
Relevant Event.
25.2 .3 The Contractor shall give such further written notices to the Employer
as ma
y be reasonably necessary for keeping up-to-date the particulars
489
Wells
v.
Army & Navy Co-operative Society
(1902) 86 LT 764.
490
Scott Lithgow Ltd
v.
Secretary of State for Defence
(1989) 45 BLR 1.
491
John Mowlem & Co
v.
Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd
(1995) 62 BLR 126.
