A Contractor in his quotation for a CE, has stated that the accepted Programme was incorrect and has "corrected" it, citing the Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol, "“Prior to determining the effect of an Employer Risk Event on the Updated Programme, any patently unreasonable or unrealistic logic, constraints or durations should be corrected”. This "corrected" Programme is used to demonstrate a period of prolongation. Is this valid? It seems to cut across clause 63.3 and potentially renders the whole process of programme submission and acceptance somewhat pointless since one cannot rely of the Contractor's programmes.
↧