McDonald, P R (1984) Construction claims costing for owners and contractors. Construction Management and Economics, 2(1), pp. 1-12. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Although the owner may have a legitimate claim against a contractor for breach of contract, calculation and proof of damages incurred by the owner is often a difficult task. Owners should be aware of the types of damages which may be recovered from contractors for delayed project completion, defective work, or abandonment of the project, and how to prove these damages. When a contractor has a legitimate construction claim against an owner, he must be aware of the wide variety of damages which he may have suffered in order to assure himself a chance of maximum monetary recovery. A claim may arise on account of a delay, disruption, or termination of the contractor's performance, and recoverable costs can be analysed under these three categories. In addition, the contractor must be careful to choose the best method of proving damages if he is to successfully prosecute his claim. Although the legal principles discussed in this article are drawn from the public and private sectors of the United States construction industry, they may be applied in arbitrations both in the United Slates and abroad.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | abandonment; acceleration; Claims; damages; defective work; delays |
| Index terms: | costing, construction industry, arbitration, acceleration, recovery, private sector, owner, construction claim, United States, breach of contract, abandonment, damages |
| Subjects: | operations management, dispute resolution, project controls, payment, sociology, industry analysis, completion, accounting and finance, Geography |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Stakeholder Management, Legal Issues, Time Control, Contract Administration |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here