The Society of Construction Law in the UK has now released its consultation draft of the 2nd edition of the Delay and Disruption Protocol.
This is an important document, not only in the UK but internationally, including Australia. Thus, for example, the Supreme Court of South Australia in ALSTOM LTD v YOKOGAWA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD & ANOR (No 7) [2012] SASC 49 made repeated references to the Protocol, and rejected the analysis of one of the parties saying at [1277]
It is not a method referred to in the Protocol.
And at 1282:
The first problem with this method is that it is not an accepted method of delay analysis for construction programming practitioners. Mr King had never encountered this particular method before. It is not mentioned in the Protocol as a recognised method of delay analysis. Mr Lynas also agreed that this method, to the best of his recollection, was not mentioned in the text Delay and Disruption in Construction Contracts by Keith Pickavance,[1]
It is now some 14 years since the 1st Edition, which will shortly be superceded by this new edition.
The consultation draft is also being made available to SoCLA members on its website. The Society of Construction Law is looking for coordinated comments, so if any members of SoCLA have any comments, please send them to me at rfenwickelliott@keatingchambers.com by 10th July, and I will then gather these Australian comments together and submit them to the coordinating committee in London.
The new Protocol will the subject of a panel session at which I will be speaking in Sao Paulo, Brazil on 13th to 15th September; see http://scl2016.com/. These SCL International Biennial Conferences are always good, not only for those of us who have an international element to our practices, but also for those willing to learn from how things are done differently (sometimes better!) in other parts of the world. I am looking forward to it.
[1] T8611:18-22.