Who Owns the Float - A Quantum Expert Guide
A common question when demonstrating entitlement to an Extension of Time is 'who owns the float?'
When considering who owns the float, one first must understand the various definitions of 'float' typically associated with construction projects. Secondly, one must understand the applicable contractual clause relating to claiming an extension of time.
What is Float?
Most people will associate float with the CPM (critical path method) of scheduling. The critical path is determined by the sequence of activities within a program that dictates the overall program duration, i.e., the 'critical path' has zero total floats.
However, there are several other applicable definitions of float, namely:
Free float: the amount of time an activity can be delayed without impacting upon the start time of its immediate successive activities.
Interfering float: the difference between the total float and free float.
Internal float: built-in float between the planned start and completion dates within the program (time contingency).
External float: float between the Date for Completion and the Date of Completion.
The consideration of 'external float' raises the question of 'who owns the float'.
The Contractor may argue that it 'owns' the float because they plan how the work should be carried out and in what sequence. They may also allow a 'buffer' or contingency between its likely Date of Completion and the Date for Completion.
Suppose, therefore, there is any delay to the Contractor's progress for which the Contractor is not responsible[1]. The time contingency has not been fully exhausted. In this case, the Contractor may contend that it is entitled to an extension of time, even if the delay to progress did not result in the Date for Completion being impacted. Rather the delay merely 'eroded' its planned time contingency. In this scenario the Contractor owns the float.
On the other hand, the Employer may consider the Contractor has no contractual remedy for being prevented from completing the works before the contractual Date for Completion. Meaning the Contractor is not entitled to an extension of time unless the delay results in the Date for Completion date being impacted. In this scenario, the project owns the float.
The expression 'float' is rarely if ever, defined in the conditions of the contract. Where the wording of the extension of time clause is such that an extension of time is only to be granted if the Employer delays completion beyond the Date for Completion, then the likely effect of that wording is that all external float must be 'consumed' before an extension of time will be due.
Suppose the wording of the extension of time clause is such that an extension of time will be due whenever the Employer delay event adversely impacts the Date for Completion date. In that case, the external float will not be available for the benefit of the Employer in the event of an Employer related delay.
