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
Change of use legislation breaths new life into buildings
A run down on Class MA of the General Permitted Development Order.
Solar generation in the historic environment
Success requires understanding each site in detail.
Level 6 Design, Construction and Management BSc
CIOB launches first-ever degree programme to develop the next generation of construction leaders.
Open for business as of April, with its 2026 prospectus and new pipeline of housing schemes.
The operational value of workforce health
Keeping projects moving. Incorporating unplanned absence and the importance of health, in operations.
A carbon case for indigenous slate
UK slate can offer clear embodied carbon advantages.
Costs and insolvencies mount for SMEs, despite growth
Construction sector under insolvency and wage bill pressure in part linked to National Insurance, says report.
The place for vitrified clay pipes in modern infrastructure
Why vitrified clay pipes are reclaiming their role in built projects.
Research by construction PR consultancy LMC published.
Roles and responsibilities of domestic clients
ACA Safety in Construction guide for domestic clients.
Fire door compliance in UK commercial buildings
Architect and manufacturer gives their low down.
The new towns and strategic environmental assessments
12 locations of the New Towns Taskforce reduced to 7 within the new towns draft programme and open consultation.
Buildings that changed the future of architecture. Book review.



















