Time at Large Principle in Works for Multiplex -myassignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theTime at Large Principle in Works for Multiplex Constructions. Answer: Time is a relevant subject in any industry, making delays in completing works costly and may lead to legal liability for any damage as a result of the delay. This responsibility lies on the party that was responsible for the delay. Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd [2013] For instance, if a property developer does not finish his building project on time, it may lead to damages such as loss of rent or a law suit from the prospective tenant as that is a breach of contract. To avoid such occurrences, the contractor will have to ensure the property is finished in time for the tenant to occupy it. To ensure clarity, the following issues are outlined before a building project: The date to begin the works, when the contractor fully possesses the site as well as the date by which it should be completed. This binds the contractor legally such that failure to achieve what was agreed upon will lead to legal consequences and the employer has the right to rescind the contract and sue for damages. Trollope Colls Ltd v North West Metropolitan Regional Hospital Board [1973] 1 WLR 601 In some cases however, time limit may not be valuable in the event where some parts of the contract contradict the time limit, example, if there was a provision allowing for extension of time in the contract. The employer can only sue the contactor if there is delay in completion of works before the specified time, not a delay in works. According to contractual law, the contractor must begin work immediately he gets access to the site. Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd [2013] In my view, time at large principle is outdated because there may be other factors causing delays such as additional works and variations. It is unrealistic to expect the contractor to finish the job at the stipulated time if more work is added. It is therefore necessary to allow flexibility in works. References Trollope Colls Ltd v North West Metropolitan Regional Hospital Board [1973] 1 WLR 601, Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd [2013]