Expert Witness Journal Issue 68 August 2026 - Flipbook - Page 20
If you are dealing with delays or claims in your
project, getting the right help early can really make
a di昀昀erence. Get in touch with Jamie or one of the
team and we can support you with all aspects of
delay analysis and claims management, from live
projects through to disputes.
as programmes, progress reports, site diaries,
photographs, and meeting minutes allow an expert
to show what actually happened and when.
Without reliable records, any delay analysis risks
becoming speculative and assumption-based, which
courts and tribunals are unlikely to accept. Proper
record keeping therefore underpins the ability to
demonstrate cause and e昀昀ect. It strengthens the
credibility of expert evidence, and signi昀椀cantly
improves a party’s prospects of success in any delayrelated dispute.
About the author
Jamie is an expert construction planner with over 10
years of on-site experience across the infrastructure,
building, and civil engineering sectors. He has a
strong background in project planning, programme
management, and the analysis of live projects and
strategic portfolios.
What This Means for Delay Experts
Santos Limited v Fluor Australia Pty Ltd [2025] QSC
184 shows that delay analysis is not just a technical
task. It is about judgment and communication.
Jamie has acted as a delay expert on major
infrastructure disputes and has supported clients
through adjudication, arbitration, and litigation. He
also advises employers, contractors, and consultants
on delay claims, extension of time applications, and
programme-related matters.
A good delay expert should:
• Use a clear method that others can understand.
• Show how one delay event led to another, relying
on contemporaneous as-built records to support the
evidenced delays.
• Follow recognised guidance sensibly and avoid
speculation and assumptions.
For more help with this or any related issues, get in
touch today.
https://trconsult.co.uk/
In short, the expert needs both technical skill and
practical construction understanding.
What This Means for Clients and
Lawyers/Instructing Solicitors
For those choosing an expert, the message is clear:
Pick someone who can explain the story of the
project, not just produce complex diagrams or rely
solely on software modelling. An expert who relies
on theory or assumptions without real evidence
risks having their work rejected.
The most persuasive expert is the one who can
describe the project and delay in a way that is easy
to understand and does not over complicate it.
Ultimately, many decision makers are not from
a delay background. Making the analysis and
conclusions easy to follow while simultaneously
relying on actual records will be preferred.
Final Thought
Santos v Fluor reminds us that delay analysis is not
about clever models or colourful programmes. It is
about explaining why a delay happened in a way that
makes sense.
Good experts don’t just show where the critical path
is, they show where it is and why it moved, using the
facts.
That is what the Court trusted — and that is the
lesson for everyone involved in delay analysis.
EXPERT WITNESS JOURNAL
18
AUGUST 2026
