SCL Delay and Disruption Protocol

The Society of Construction Law (SCL) Delay and Disruption Protocol, now in its second edition (2017), provides a framework for how delay and disruption claims should be managed and analysed on construction contracts. It covers core principles (entitlement, concurrency, float ownership, programme management), the analytical methods used in delay expert reports (as-planned vs as-built, time impact analysis, window analysis, collapsed as-built) and the evidential standards that claims and defences are expected to meet.

While the SCL Protocol is not contractually binding on its own, it is widely adopted as best practice across UK construction, infrastructure and energy projects, and is routinely cited in adjudication, arbitration and High Court delay disputes. Expert witnesses producing delay reports will typically describe their methodology in SCL terms, and tribunals will test the analysis against SCL expectations. A delay analysis that departs from SCL methodology without justification will struggle to survive cross-examination.

For project controls practitioners, the Protocol has two practical implications. First, programme management discipline during delivery — the quality of the Accepted Programme, the rigour of progress updates, the traceability of compensation events and variations — determines whether delay analysis can be carried out at all if disputes emerge later. Second, delay analysis requires specialist expertise: the difference between a time impact analysis that will stand up in adjudication and one that will not comes down to method selection, baseline hygiene, and evidential documentation. SOMA supports delay expert reports and provides controls evidence structured to the SCL Protocol standard.