FIDIC / Legal Reference: SCL Protocol 2nd Edition — Preferred Methodologies
The process of identifying, quantifying, and attributing delays on a construction project to determine their impact on the completion date and which party bears responsibility. Delay analysis underpins all extension of time and prolongation cost claims and is typically presented through expert evidence in construction arbitrations.
What it means in practice
The SCL Protocol (2nd Edition, 2017) identifies five main delay analysis methodologies: Time Impact Analysis (TIA — the preferred method), Windows Analysis, As-Planned versus As-Built, Collapsed As-Built, and Retrospective Longest Path. Each methodology has different data requirements, analytical rigour, and susceptibility to challenge.
Time Impact Analysis tests the impact of each delay event on the programme as it stood at the time the event occurred — using a series of snapshot analyses through the project period. It is the most analytically rigorous methodology but requires a good-quality accepted baseline programme and contemporaneous data.
Where disputes arise
Delay experts routinely disagree on methodology, the identification of the critical path, the attribution of delay events to specific parties, and the treatment of concurrent delay. The credibility and persuasiveness of the delay expert often determines the outcome of the dispute more than the legal arguments.
UAE Context
UAE construction arbitrations at DIAC and ICC increasingly require expert delay evidence in complex multi-party disputes. The standard of delay analysis expected by experienced UAE arbitrators has risen significantly over the past decade.
Related terms
e-Basel provides independent delay analysis and expert witness services for construction arbitrations, adjudications, and dispute resolution proceedings across the UAE.
Delay Analysis Expert UAE →Search terms: delay analysis construction UAE · delay expert witness UAE · SCL protocol methodology · construction delay analysis FIDIC · time impact analysis UAE