• 한국건축시공학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국건축시공학회 2002년도 학술.기술논문발표회
• /
• pp.111-116
• /
• 2002

The delay of the completion of the construction project occurs frequently because the origin schedule is affected by numerous factors that contribute to the overall delay in completing the project. But in our country. the dealing with a claim is not sufficient yet by reasons of fairl relation between owner and constructor, cognitive shortage in claim, and such. especially they have make a wrong application of baseless the rule. In this study. we make a rational model ; that includes calculating of dispute costs, and suggest the solution and the prevention for claim by considerating the law followed liquidated damages.

• 한국건축시공학회지
• /
• 제3권2호
• /
• pp.95-102
• /
• 2003

Financial difficulties and claims frequently stop construction works and cause subsequent contract cancellations. However, as the criteria to assess costs have not been established, many cases of legal disputes over the assessment of cancellation costs are taking place and the concerned parties are suffering the loss of time and money. Therefore, the present research aimed at developing a rational and systematic model of cancellation cost assessment following the cancellation of contracts. The research was carried out in the following methods and scopes. 1 ) The research was focused on the assessment of fair cancellation costs from constructors' side for contracts cancelled by any causes for which the owners have liability. 2) To obtain basic materials about cancellation cost assessment methods, contracts, claims, contract cancellations and construction-related laws at home and abroad were examined. 3) A cost assessment model was developed for systematization and efficient operation of cancellation cost assessment, and the reliability and efficiency of the proposed model was verified through a case study. The conclusions drawn from the research are as follows. The importance of the cancellation cost assessment model was confirmed as, using the cancellation cost assessment model, direct cancellation cost and indirect cancellation cost could be assessed systematically, the number of disputable items could be reduced because reasonable evidences of actual spending were presented, and the loss of constructors could be minimized because systematic and rational cost assessment became possible for many disputable cases of indirect cancellation cost, which the constructors had been unable to prove so far though having spent.