I might be as bold as to say you are both wrong. You say that two days with in the month was a 1:10 event. You then assess the impact of that CE. Two days of rain does not equal two day movement in planned Completion – it might be more or it might be less. If the critical path runs through say off site procurement of materials which is unaffected by the weather, then whilst the weather was a 1:10 year event which is a CE the impact on planned completion/Completion Date at least would be zero.
Equally if that two days of rain meant that an inspection had to be cancelled which would be rescheduled for a week later, which then would delay the procurement period into a shutdown period in the factory which then delayed the excavation works into winter working then the impact could be several weeks. I don’t mean this should be dreamed up, but that first of all you prove that something does qualify as a compensation event, and then you assess the impact of that event upon planned Completion. This does mean that IF you can prove the reinstatement of the site was an additional two days due to the 2 days that were a valid CE then yes this would be part of the assessment (but only if).
Equally if that two days of rain meant that an inspection had to be cancelled which would be rescheduled for a week later, which then would delay the procurement period into a shutdown period in the factory which then delayed the excavation works into winter working then the impact could be several weeks. I don’t mean this should be dreamed up, but that first of all you prove that something does qualify as a compensation event, and then you assess the impact of that event upon planned Completion. This does mean that IF you can prove the reinstatement of the site was an additional two days due to the 2 days that were a valid CE then yes this would be part of the assessment (but only if).