Prolongation in construction contracts
As per the definition contained in the Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol the term ‘prolongation’ refers to 'the extended duration of the works during which time-related costs are incurred as a result of a delay' - usually recognised as the additional projected time required to complete a contract extending beyond the contractual completion date.
Prolongation costs are the additional costs that a contractor has incurred as a result of the completion of the works being delayed by an event that is the responsibility of the other party (usually the Employer). Such events might include; failing to give the contractor possession of the site on the date specified in the contract; delays in giving instructions, and so on.
The contractor may incur additional costs as a result of having to remain on site for longer than anticipated, for example, additional labour costs, plant costs, off-site overheads, fluctuations, and so on.
Prolongation is sometimes described as being synonymous with ‘loss and expense’, however, this is incorrect. Loss and expense is a wider term that refers to matters which are the responsibility of the client that materially affect the progress of the works. This includes matters that disrupt, rather than delay the progress of the works, but still entitle the contractor to make a claim for additional costs incurred. Claims for disruption result from the additional cost of adopting inefficient working methods as a result of the disruption.
For more information, see Disruption claims in construction.
Prolongation and disruption therefore are two separate elements that might result in a claim for loss and expense. The prolongation element is dependent on the completion date being delayed.
Depending on the terms of the construction contract, prolongation might relate to the project as a whole, or to a specific aspect of it.
Generally a disruption event is easier to prove than a critical delay prolongation event i.e. a failed critical delay prolongation claim will often be used as proof of disruption. However, prolongation costs are often considered easier to demonstrate than disruption costs.
For more information see: Loss and expense.
[edit] Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki
Featured articles and news
Confirming previously announced funding, and welfare changes amid adjusted growth forecast.
Scottish Government responds to Grenfell report
As fund for unsafe cladding assessments is launched.
CLC and BSR process map for HRB approvals
One of the initial outputs of their weekly BSR meetings.
Architects Academy at an insulation manufacturing facility
Programme of technical engagement for aspiring designers.
Building Safety Levy technical consultation response
Details of the planned levy now due in 2026.
Great British Energy install solar on school and NHS sites
200 schools and 200 NHS sites to get solar systems, as first project of the newly formed government initiative.
600 million for 60,000 more skilled construction workers
Announced by Treasury ahead of the Spring Statement.
The restoration of the novelist’s birthplace in Eastwood.
Life Critical Fire Safety External Wall System LCFS EWS
Breaking down what is meant by this now often used term.
PAC report on the Remediation of Dangerous Cladding
Recommendations on workforce, transparency, support, insurance, funding, fraud and mismanagement.
New towns, expanded settlements and housing delivery
Modular inquiry asks if new towns and expanded settlements are an effective means of delivering housing.
Building Engineering Business Survey Q1 2025
Survey shows growth remains flat as skill shortages and volatile pricing persist.
Construction contract awards remain buoyant
Infrastructure up but residential struggles.
Warm Homes Plan and existing energy bill support policies
Breaking down what existing policies are and what they do.
A dynamic brand built for impact stitched into BSRIA’s building fabric.