SCL Delay and Disruption Protocol: Key Principles

What the Protocol is

The Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol is a widely referenced statement of recommended good practice for dealing with delay and disruption on construction projects. It is not a contract and not law; it is persuasive guidance that many practitioners, employers and tribunals treat as a sensible default. Referencing it describes an approach, not an endorsement.

Programmes and records come first

A recurring theme of the Protocol is that good outcomes depend on things done during the works: maintaining a proper baseline programme, updating it regularly, and keeping contemporaneous records. Most of the difficulty in delay claims traces back to a failure to do these basics — which is why schedule assurance and record discipline are really claims preparation in advance.

Extension of time

On EOT, the Protocol favours dealing with entitlement close to the time of the delay event, using the programme then current — an approach aligned with Time Impact Analysis. Assessing entitlement promptly, on contemporaneous information, tends to produce fairer and more defensible results than leaving it to a retrospective battle at the end.

Concurrent delay and disruption

The Protocol addresses concurrent delay — where employer-risk and contractor-risk events overlap — and treats disruption (loss of productivity) as distinct from delay to completion. Keeping these concepts separate is essential to a coherent construction claim.

How it is used

In practice the Protocol provides a shared reference point for method and expectation, reducing argument about how delay should be approached so the focus can stay on what the evidence shows. Applied well, it underpins the kind of forensic delay analysis that resolves a contested position to a figure that holds.

This is a general explanation of a professional framework, not legal advice.