Draft text under review by DAC.
- Test one
- Test two
Para A
Para B
Capability Example: Integrated Expert Witness Support in a Complex Construction Arbitration
SECTOR
SERVICES
FORUM
Illustrative animation. People and facilities shown are not from the project.
Illustrative animation. People and project visuals shown are not from this matter.
Illustrative animation. Equipment and project visuals shown are not from this matter.
Illustrative animation. Equipment, diagrams and charts are schematic, not case evidence.
Illustrative animation. Structures, schedules and cost diagrams are schematic, not case evidence.
Illustrative animation. Pipeline geometry and inspection visuals are schematic, not case evidence.
Thank you. We have received your message, and a member of the DAC team will be in touch.
The situation our client faced
A large high-rise office development experienced significant delays and cost overruns during construction.
Technical issues, design changes, construction defects, and productivity concerns led to an ICC arbitration between the developer and contractor. The central questions were:
- Were there design deficiencies or construction defects?
- Which events affected the critical path and completion date?
- How did design changes, inefficiencies, and external factors affect the project?
- What prolongation, disruption, and rework costs were supported by the contract and project records?
What the client needed from DAC
The client needed integrated expert support that could help its legal team and the tribunal understand the relationship between the technical issues, schedule impacts, and financial claims.
DAC was asked to:
- Assess alleged design deficiencies, defects, and material nonconformities.
- Establish the causes and impact of delay on project completion.
- Quantify prolongation, disruption, rework, and other claimed costs.
- Present a single, clear, and defensible expert case for arbitration.
How we approached the matter
DAC reviewed the contracts, design information, schedules, progress records, and other contemporaneous project documents.
The technical team assessed the alleged defects and design issues. The delay team used critical-path analysis and Time Impact Analysis to evaluate the effects of design changes, contractor inefficiencies, and other events on completion. The quantum team then tested the claimed financial consequences against the contractual framework and supporting records.
By coordinating the three disciplines, DAC was able to present the tribunal with one connected explanation of cause, time, and cost.
Note: DAC selects the method that best fits the available schedules, project records, contractual requirements, and the question the tribunal needs answered. The integrated approach used here was appropriate for this matter; it is not a one-size-fits-all solution.
What this example demonstrates for you
When a construction dispute involves technical issues, delay, and damages, DAC can help you:
- Test technical allegations against the project evidence.
- Trace relevant events through the schedule to understand their effect on completion.
- Connect those impacts to the financial consequences at issue.
- Give counsel and the decision-maker one coherent, evidence-based expert story.
Does this resemble your situation?
Every dispute is different. But if your matter involves defects, design changes, disputed delay responsibility, productivity concerns, prolongation, disruption, or damages on a complex construction project, this example may provide a useful starting point for discussing how DAC can help.
Facing a similar matter?
Discuss your matter with us. We will assess the issues and assemble the right technical, delay, and quantum expertise.