Concurrency is the most argued and least understood issue in construction delay. What the term actually requires, and the assumptions that waste months of negotiation.
Concurrent delay is often raised as a defence to any claim where both parties were doing something unhelpful at the same time. True concurrency is narrower than that: it requires two effective causes of delay to completion operating over the same period, each of which would have caused the delay on its own. Most asserted concurrency is sequential delay, or delay to work that was not critical.
How to test a claim like this
Test any concurrency assertion with three questions. Were both causes actually delaying completion, as opposed to delaying some activity with float? Were they operating over the same period, rather than one after the other? And would each, on its own, have delayed completion by the period claimed? If any answer is no, the correct description is not concurrency, and calling it concurrency obscures what the records actually show.
Myth 1: If both parties caused delay at around the same time, the delays are concurrent.
Reality: Concurrency requires both causes to be effective causes of delay to completion over a common period. Two events in the same month, one affecting the critical path and the other affecting work with weeks of float, are not concurrent. Nor are two events that affected completion one after the other, even if the overall project was late throughout.
How to check it yourself: Plot both alleged causes against the critical path for the period in question, and establish whether each was independently delaying completion.
Myth 2: Concurrency means the contractor gets time but no money.
Reality: That outcome is common in practice under many forms, on the basis that the contractor should not recover prolongation cost for a period it would have been delayed in any event, but it is a product of the contract wording and the governing law rather than a universal rule. Some contracts allocate concurrency expressly, and the drafting changes the answer.
How to check it yourself: Read your own contract for an express concurrency provision and ask a licensed legal adviser how it operates under the governing law before conceding either time or money.
Myth 3: Float belongs to the contractor, so any delay to a non critical activity still counts.
Reality: Ownership of float is a real question and the contracts treat it differently, but it does not convert a non critical delay into a delay to completion. Consuming float may expose the contractor to risk and may have cost consequences, yet until the activity becomes critical it has not delayed the completion date, and that is what an extension of time measures.
How to check it yourself: Identify the float on the affected activity at the time of the event, and state whether and when it was exhausted.
Myth 4: Showing some contractor culpable delay defeats the whole claim.
Reality: A culpable delay does not act as a general defence. It is relevant only where it was an effective cause of delay to completion over the same period as the event relied upon. Raising it generally, without analysis, tends to prolong a negotiation without changing the outcome, because the analysis still has to be done before anything can be decided.
How to check it yourself: Require any concurrency defence to identify the activity, the period and the critical path effect, with document references.
Myth 5: Concurrency can be assessed from the bar chart.
Reality: A bar chart shows planned and actual dates; it does not show what was controlling completion. Concurrency is a question about causation on the critical path, which needs the logic, the progress data and the site records. Two bars overlapping on a printout proves nothing about whether both were delaying the end date.
How to check it yourself: Insist on the native programme file with logic, plus the site records for the period, before accepting or asserting concurrency.
Myth 6: Once concurrency is agreed, the claim is over.
Reality: Agreeing that a period was concurrent resolves one period. Most disputes involve several events across a long programme, and concurrency in one window says nothing about the next. The productive approach is to resolve the periods one by one, recording what was agreed in each, rather than seeking a single global answer.
How to check it yourself: Break the programme into periods and settle each window separately, with a written record of the agreed position for each.
What this changes in your decision
- Define concurrency in writing at the start of any delay discussion, so both parties are arguing about the same thing.
- Require any concurrency assertion to identify the activity, the period and the critical path effect with document references.
- Establish the float position on every affected activity at the time of the event, not at completion.
- Resolve delay period by period rather than seeking one global determination.
- Check whether your contract allocates concurrency expressly, and get a licensed adviser view on how it operates before conceding time or cost.
Domira builds and supervises projects across Saudi Arabia, and the commercial discipline above is how its projects stay inside their budget and their programme. Send the drawings, the contract or the site and Domira will tell you where the risk actually sits.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is concurrent delay in construction?
It describes the situation where two or more effective causes of delay to completion, one the responsibility of each party, operate over the same period, and each would have caused the delay on its own. The key requirements are that both causes affect completion rather than non critical work, and that they overlap in time rather than following one another.
Does a contractor get an extension of time for concurrent delay?
Frequently yes for time, on the basis that the owner event was an effective cause of delay, while prolongation cost for the concurrent period is often refused because the contractor would have been delayed anyway. That outcome depends on the contract wording and the governing law rather than on a fixed rule, so the position has to be confirmed with a licensed legal adviser for your specific contract.
Does float in the programme belong to the contractor or the owner?
The contracts take different positions, and the answer affects whether consuming float has consequences. What is settled in practice is that delay to an activity with float has not delayed the completion date until the float is exhausted, so an extension of time generally depends on showing an effect on completion. State the float position at the time of each event rather than arguing about ownership in the abstract.
Have a Property Question?
Domira can help you navigate property, financing and investment decisions in Saudi Arabia. Speak with our team for an initial consultation.
