Time Extension and Compensation for Contractor’s Overhead in Construction Project

[[abstract]]工程契約能獲准延期之關鍵在於造成延誤的原因為非可歸責於施工廠商，是所謂可體諒的延誤(excusable delay)。對於此類延誤造成管理費之增加，由於國內大多數合約皆無明確合理之規定，因之廠商往往無法依約獲得公平合理之補償而造成不必要之爭議。本研究之目的即在探究各種延誤情況時，管理費之給付以及費用計算之公平合理性。 本研究蒐集國內現有合約有關工期展延及費用補償之規定以及商務仲裁有關工期延誤求償之13個案例。針對非可歸責於承商之各種工程展期之情況加以分析整理出可獲得管理費補償之基本條件外，並建立申請展期及要求補償之處理模式。另外，本研究結果顯示，國內工程合約存在諸多不公平之棄權及免責條款，造成許多爭議應予以刪除，且對於雙方之責任應予以明確規定。同時，以國內之案例而言，非可歸責於廠商之延誤多可獲得時間之調整然而管理費用部份之計算須扣除可預見停工之風險180天，亦相當不公平。[[abstract]]The circumstances that could be granted by client for time extension are excusable and beyond the control of the contractor and sometimes entitle the contractor to an equitable adjustment for any increase in cost to the performance of the contract. In Taiwan, because the reimbursement of contractor overhead was not clearly specified in most contracts, many disputes occurred and the issue has drawn more and more attention. This study aims to analyze and summarize the conditions of various excusable and compensable delays and reasonable ways of pricing contractor’s overhead and then, provide a guideline for both contractors and owners to avoid disputes. Conclusions are made based on the analysis of information collected from literatures of previous researches, contract conditions of most representative public projects, and thirteen arbitration cases in regard to time extension and reimbursement of overhead. The study results appear that in Taiwan public construction contracts, many unfair conditions including waive and exculpatory clauses, which deprive contractor right to claim for an equitable adjustment, should be removed, and contractors can only be awarded, through arbitration, for those overhead that exceeds 180 days, which is considered as foreseeable risk. Furthermore, this study built up a set of essential conditions of excusable delays and a standard procedure to apply a claim for time extension and overhead