Business case
A 350 mUSD dispute over a major bridge construction project involved competing delay narratives across multiple structures and workstreams, under detailed expert scrutiny.
The analysis provided a clear basis for comparing competing delay positions. It enabled the Tribunal to have a focused discussion on causation and concurrency, supported by structured and independent expert evidence capable of withstanding the scrutiny of cross-examination.
Our team tested programme records and reconstructed the evolving critical path, assessing causation and concurrency across bridge, viaduct and foundation works. We evaluated competing critical-path theories and translated complex sequencing issues into a tested evidential framework for expert reports, hearing preparation and oral testimony.