Abstract:
'Claims' are common phenomena in construction. Among those claim situations, disruption is a very complex claim situation which is notoriously difficult to prove. In general there is no significant disruption claim practice in Sri Lanka. When a contractor is not compensated for a cost he is entitled for under the contract, an unfavourable status quo is given birth that the contractor would look for alternative means, such as spurious claims, to recover his cost. Therefore, a proper practice of disruption claims is a necessity. Thus the research was aimed to identify the reasons for poor disruption claims practice in Sri Lanka, in order to contribute the necessary know/edge to eliminate the above problem. First part of research tested the level of current knowledge of the key players in claims in the industry through an experimental study. Leading professionals dealing with contractual claims representing twelve contracting organizations participated in it. It was then supported by an exploratory element carried out through interviews among them and followed by a documentary survey within the respective organizations to review the site level document practice and associated problems. Fifteen factors are identified to lessen the occurrence of disruption claims while entitled disruptions do exist. Among them insufficient knowledge on disruption claims, was the dominant factor and
interestingly most other factors were directly linked to it.
