How is an EOT claim actually proven?
By linking the delaying event to the specific activities it impacted — which crews, which zones, which idle plant, which dates — and evidencing that link with contemporaneous records. The programme analysis shows the effect on the critical path; the daily reports, photographs and manpower returns prove the facts the analysis rests on. Without the records, the analysis is an assertion.
The linkage is the claim
Entitlement is not established by showing that an event happened. It is established by showing what that event did — to which activities, on which dates, with which resources standing idle.
That linkage lives in the daily reports or nowhere. Idle plant is disruption evidence, which is why “working versus idle” belongs on the daily record as a field rather than an afterthought.
How diaries defeat their own claims
A claim built on weeks of “work ongoing, no delays” entries is rebutted by its own records. The silent diary is not neutral — it is affirmative evidence that, at the time, nobody thought anything was going wrong.
The same applies to weather. “High winds” proves nothing. “High winds — crane operations halted 10:00–14:00” proves impact, and impact compared against a long-term meteorological baseline is what makes climatic conditions “exceptionally adverse”.
In the guides
Terms
References
- module: /modules/daily-reports/ — SCL Delay & Disruption Protocol (Core Principle 1); FIDIC 2017
Zepth is the construction project delivery platform — it runs construction, procurement and asset management on one record, and does the work: reading the drawings, reviewing the submittals, matching the invoices and flagging the risks, with a human sign-off on anything consequential.
Related questions
See Zepth on your project.
A short, tailored walkthrough on your real workflow — no generic demo.
Book a meeting