N Midland v Cyden: clarity at last?

摘要

The topic of concurrent delay has been a talking point this year following the case of North Midland Building v Cyden Homes.The issue is simple enough, in theory. Two events, caused by different parties on a project, happen at the same time and both have an impact on the critical path, causing a delay to completion. It's then down to lawyers to interpret the relevant contract terms and the law that applies.In the case of North Midland v Cyden, the contractor had argued that time was "at large" and it only needed to complete the project in "reasonable" time. This was due to a combination of an employer delay and the "prevention principle". This holds that a party cannot benefit from causing its own problems, so, in construction for example, the employer can't stop the contractor from working, then claim damages for the project running late.