Powered by Lexis+® UK
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
Glossary
CASE STUDY

“We have to become more agile as our clients' expectations and requirements change. The only thing we know is that tomorrow is going to be different and we must be prepared. With LexisNexis, I feel more confident of that we're ready every time.”

Wolverhampton County Council

Access all documents on Critical path

Critical path meaning

What does Critical path mean?
In construction and project scheduling, the critical path is the sequence of activities that controls the earliest date by which the works can reach completion (often practical or substantial completion, depending on the contract). Activities on the critical path have zero total float; any delay to them, if not mitigated, will delay overall completion. The term is not defined by statute and has no fixed legal definition. It is a descriptive, project‑management concept widely used in contracts (including JCT, NEC and RIAI forms) and recognised by the courts as a useful tool in delay analysis and extension‑of‑time claims, without prescribing any single analytical method. Its identification is typically shown on the contractor’s baseline and updated programmes using the critical path method (CPM) and may change as the logic, sequencing or durations evolve, or when variations and compensation events occur. Legally and practically, the critical path underpins assessments of entitlement to extensions of time, liability for liquidated damages, concurrency, acceleration and prolongation costs. Across England & Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, usage is broadly consistent: altering the sequence or duration of critical activities, or changing the planned order and manner of their completion, can affect the contractor’s ability to finish on time.
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about Critical path

NEWS
Singapore court rejects intra‑EU ECT objection; Achmea/Komstroy no bar; treaty ‘investment’ definition prevails; public policy, fork‑in‑the‑road and natural justice challenges dismissed

What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling has meaningful consequences for advisers working on intra‑EU investment disputes and on enforcement tactics. Strategic seat selection: The judgment confirms that choosing a seat outside the EU—most notably Singapore—can shield ECT arbitrations from intra‑EU objections grounded in Achmea and Komstroy. Although those CJEU authorities expose intra‑EU awards to challenge within the Union, they do not impugn the validity of such awards in jurisdictions beyond the EU framework. Seat selection is therefore a critical strategic choice from the outset of any intra‑EU investor‑State dispute. Enforcement planning: Award creditors should look to enforce in non‑EU courts that are not bound by EU law doctrines. The SICC’s firm rejection of the intra‑EU objection outlines a clear path to enforcement outside the EU, offering a practical alternative where courts in EU Member States may decline recognition and enforcement. Definition of ‘investment’: The court’s refusal to apply the Salini criteria where the treaty provides its own definition of ‘investment’...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
TCS v DBS: IT outsourcing delay—no implied systems integrator role, critical path causation, notice estoppel, loss-of-profits exclusion, flawed partial termination, and drafting/contract management lessons

The dispute stemmed from a 2012 agreement for the modernisation of DBS’ services (the ‘Agreement’), under which TCS undertook to assume control of and operate DBS’ legacy platforms whilst creating new digital offerings. From day one, the programme suffered delays, prompting a reset of contractual milestones. TCS maintained that DBS was the source of those delays and, in particular, that DBS’ IT hosting provider, Hewlett Packard Enterprises (HPE), caused a critical delay. DBS contended that the true cause was that TCS’ software was not ready to be deployed on the infrastructure owing to slippage in the development and testing of the software, and further said it bore no responsibility for HPE’s activities. TCS sought £110m in delay damages. DBS advanced a counterclaim for delay, together with claims tied to deficient software quality. A separate, self-contained dispute between the parties also arose concerning the correct reading of the volume-based service charges mechanism, valued at £14m. The Agreement featured numerous interpretation issues unique to the matter, many of which were specific to...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about Critical path

PRACTICE NOTES
Construction delay analysis methodologies: critical path, prospective v retrospective approaches, and method selection under the SCL Delay and Disruption Protocol (2nd ed.)

Delay analysis Delay analysis is a specialist technique used by programming/planning experts to pinpoint delay and its cause(s) in relation to a project’s works completion date. In turn, this enables responsibility under the contract, and liability for the delay, to be determined. Software tools are routinely employed within delay analysis. This Practice Note outlines the principal delay analysis methodologies in common use, together with the key terms that accompany them. It adopts the framework set out in the second edition of the Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol (SCL Protocol), guidance section 11. For further details on the SCL Protocol, see Practice Note: Delay and disruption in construction projects—The Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol. Owing to their highly technical character, none of the delay analysis methods lends itself to a simple or brief explanation. Accordingly, only concise overviews are given here, and readers are urged to consult the SCL Protocol or other authoritative, in-depth studies. Taken as a whole, delay analysis is a demanding...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
UK construction law glossary—C: contracts, procurement, CDM, insurance and dispute resolution

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Call-off The method, within a framework agreement, of directing particular works to be undertaken when needed, as appropriate. According to the arrangement's format and conditions, a call-off might demand that a separate contract is concluded, or it may simply need the instructing party to issue a call off notice. Refer to Practice Note: Framework agreements in construction—call-off procedures. CAR insurance Consult Contractor's all risk (CAR) insurance below. Category A fit out Interior fit out provided to a fundamental standard for landlords/developers, typically. Pinning down the scope is challenging, as it can differ quite widely in practice. Nevertheless, guidance does exist, such as authoritative publications issued by the British Council for Offices. Category B fit out Interior fit out delivered to an exact specified design for occupiers/owners...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Construction delay analysis: practical guidance and worked examples of six methodologies, with emphasis on APAB and time slice windows, for critical path assessment and extensions of time

Introduction Delay analysis is undertaken by planning/programming specialists to determine the extent of delay to a project and the reasons for any movement to the completion date. This involves defining the critical path through the works and identifying delay events that fell on that path, thereby causing critical delay. Numerous methodologies exist and are typically chosen at the planning/programming analyst’s discretion. Several are endorsed by industry guidance, including the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering International (AACEI) Recommended Practice 29R-03 and the 2nd Edition of the Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol (SCL Protocol). Specialist programming software, such as Primavera P6 or Asta Powerproject, is commonly employed to undertake a delay analysis, although, as this Practice Note explains, some techniques place greater reliance on the programmes than others. The six main delay analysis methodologies are: Impacted as-planned analysis Time impact analysis Time slice windows analysis As-planned versus as-built in window analysis Retrospective longest path analysis Collapsed as-built...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Precedents about Critical path

PRECEDENTS
Precedent clause: contractor’s programme, critical path, monthly progress reporting, delay notices and revised programmes

Contractor’s programme 1 Within seven days from the Contract date, the Contractor, at no additional cost, shall supply and deliver to the Employer a programme for execution of the Works [ setting out the critical path and ] and incorporating particulars and data required by the [ insert relevant contract document eg Employer’s Requirements if JCT Design and Build form used ]. Thereafter, at monthly intervals, the Contractor shall: 1.1 submit a written report to the Employer comparing the progress of the Works against the programme then current; 1.2 advise the Employer of any delay in accordance with clause [ insert relevant clause reference ]; 1.3 provide the Employer with a revised programme for the Works...

Read More Right Arrow