Client: Large International Pharma and Life-Science Company
Contract size: 21 Million Euro
Dispute: Contractor submitted an unsubstantiated 5.6 Million Euro claim threatening to delay the project if not paid in full.
Targe: Project shall not be delayed, reduce claim as much as possible.
Project details: EPC contract for brownfield project including civil works and all technical systems and plants. Tie in was planned during a general plant shutdown, time was of the essence. Contractor submitted an unsubstantiated claim for additional works and acceleration measure in the amount of 5.6 Million Euro 3 month before completion threatening to delay the project by 3 months if not agreed to. Contractor severely underestimated the works initially and tried to turn a lump-sum contract into a reimbursable contract for which contractor claimed for each hour worked.
Outcome: Dispite the brute-force behaviour shown by the contractor I still managed to reduce the claim from 5.6 Million Euro to 3.5 Million Euro. The main drives for this success were the identification the contractors lack of entitlement, the lack of actual evidence of employer risk events, the identification of contractor risk events, contractor wrongdoings, and contractors failure to cover the complete project scope in a professional manner.
Topics: Claims defense, schedule analysis, condition precedence, lack of contractual entitlement.
Above picture is only a graphical representation
Client: Large International Oil and Gas Maintenance Company
End-customer: National Oil Company in Romania
Contract size: 230 Million Euro
Project details: Tendering consultancy for large scale oilfield operations and maintenance contract. Contract duration 8 years, overall tender volume approx 1.8 Billion Euro of which I managed to win contracts of 230 Million Euros.
Topics: Pre-qualification, developing tendering strategy in close cooperation with international HQ, perform site surveys, estimate final tender price, risk assessment, HSEQ related issues. Mobilization of execution team, implementation of maintenance and operations strategies, takeover of fixed and mobile assets, takeover of maintenance and operations personnel (around 1400 people).
Main target: Winning of large scale oilfield operations and maintenance tender, implementation of novel strategies and technologies (e.g. CMMS), service improvement, improvement of plant reliability and uptime.
Above picture is only a graphical representation
Client: Large International EPC
End customer: National Oil Company
Contract size: USD 550 Million
Project details: Electrification for LNG Terminal
Topics: Implementing best practice variation order management system.
Main target: Early detection of variations, proper substantiation, contractually conform notification, final negotiation training.
Outcome: Training with project stakeholders including engineering, project management, procurement, and execution. Implementation of processes and a central variation order tool.
Above picture is only a graphical representation
Client: Large International Contractor
Project Owner: International EPC
End customer: National Oil Company
Contract size: CAD 45 Million
Project details: Onshore production project (oil sands)
Dispute: Open VORs versus applicable Liquidated Damages
Topics: Engineering changes from EPC resulting in cost and time overrun. EPC disputed any impact while at the same time applying LDs.
Main target: Prepare claim to get approval of open VORs while ate the same time defend against the application of LDs.
Outcome: Analyzing VORs with regards to cost and time impact helped avoid LDs and settle open VORs for CAD 4.9 Million.
Above picture is only a graphical representation
Client: Large International Contractor
Project Owner: International EPC
End customer: National Oil Company
Contract size: USD 31 Million
Project details: Refinery project Middle East
Dispute: Liquidated Damages defense
Claims size: USD 4,2 Million
Topics: Cost and schedule overrun partly due to design changes by the end customer. Avoiding enforcement of LDs.
Main target: Prepare claim for compensable extension of time, defend against application of Liquidated Damages
Outcome: USD 4.1 Million LD claim was settled with USD 600k by showing the critical impact of Client design changes.
Above picture is only a graphical representation
Client: Large international EPC
End customer: International oil company
Contract size: 105 Million USD
Project details: Delivery of FPSO modules
Dispute: Liquidated Damages defense and enforcement
Claims size: 18,500,000 USD
Topics: Cost and schedule overrun due to delays caused by the end customer. Enforcement of LDs towards fabrication contractor. Claims and Change Order management.
Main target: Prepare claim for extension of time, defend against incoming EOT claim, preparation of outgoing VORs, analysis of incoming VORs, defense against sub-contractor claims
Outcome: Defense against 4.7 Million LD claim, reduction of incoming claims amount of 34%, defense against EOT claim, application of LD on delayed sub-contractors
Above picture is only a graphical representation
