How to run an EOT claim properly under FIDIC 2017

1. Start with entitlement, not with the delay

An EOT claim stands or falls on a cause listed in the contract — not on the fact that the works are late. Under the 2017 Red Book, Sub-Clause 8.5 (Extension of Time for Completion) sets out the gateway causes: a Variation, a cause of delay giving an entitlement under another Sub-Clause, exceptionally adverse climatic conditions, Unforeseeable shortages of personnel or Goods caused by epidemic or governmental actions, and delay, impediment or prevention caused by or attributable to the Employer.

Before drafting anything, name the cause precisely and trace it to its operative Sub-Clause (a Variation under 13.3, late drawings under 1.9, site access under 2.1, Exceptional Events under 18.4, and so on). A claim that cites the wrong gateway invites rejection regardless of how real the delay is — and your Particular Conditions may have amended or deleted any of these gateways.

2. Respect the Sub-Clause 20.2 clock — it is a condition precedent

FIDIC 2017 consolidated the claims procedure into Sub-Clause 20.2, and its first step carries a time bar: the Notice of Claim must be given as soon as practicable and no later than 28 days after the claiming party became aware, or should have become aware, of the event or circumstance (20.2.1). Miss it and the entitlement is, on the contract's words, lost — subject only to the limited relief in 20.2.5.

The 28 days run from awareness, not from impact — a point that decides real disputes. After the Notice: keep contemporary records (20.2.3), and submit the fully detailed Claim within 84 days of awareness (20.2.4), including the contractual and/or legal basis. For events with continuing effect, the detailed claim is treated as interim, with monthly updates and a final claim after the effects end (20.2.6).

1. Day 0 — awareness of the event or circumstance (record how and when awareness arose).
2. By day 28 — Notice of Claim, identified as a Notice, delivered as the contract requires (1.3).
3. Ongoing — contemporary records sufficient to substantiate the claim (20.2.3).
4. By day 84 — fully detailed Claim: basis, EOT claimed, supporting particulars (20.2.4).
5. Continuing effects — monthly interim updates, then the final claim (20.2.6).

3. Records decide quantum — keep them contemporaneous

Tribunals and engineers alike give weight to records made at the time, not reconstructions made at claim time. The SCL Delay and Disruption Protocol's first core principle exists for a reason: programme updates, progress reports (4.20), site diaries, correspondence and photographs taken during the event are the evidential spine of the claim.

Practically: freeze a copy of the programme as it stood when the event struck, keep the updates that show the event's progress through the network, and tie cost records to the same period. The claim narrative you write later should be assembled from these — not the other way round.

4. Choose an analysis method you can defend

The method must fit the evidence and the timing. A prospective time-impact analysis suits a live claim made near the event; a retrospective time-slice / windows analysis suits a claim assembled after the effects have run; an as-planned-vs-as-built comparison may be all the records support. What does not survive scrutiny is a method chosen because it produces the biggest number.

Deal with concurrency expressly — if Employer and Contractor delays overlap, say how the analysis treats them, and check whether your Particular Conditions prescribe a treatment.

5. Structure the submission so it can be granted

Engineers grant claims they can verify. A submission that walks the reader from entitlement (the gateway clause), through cause (what happened, evidenced), to effect (the network impact, method stated), to relief (the EOT figure and any cost under the operative clause) can be checked step by step. Attach the records; cite the clauses as your contract numbers them — including Particular Conditions amendments.