黑洞社区

Amec and Morgan Sindall have been dealt a further blow in their attempt to limit their losses on their high-profile 拢142.1m nuclear submarine jetty project in Scotland after a High Court judge refused a bid by Amec to limit its liability for the project鈥檚 拢93.6m cost overruns.

Amec and Morgan Sindall could be forced to bear a combined total of at least 拢50m in costs due to ongoing delays to 拢142.1m Faslane SSN Berthing Project - also known as the Valiant Jetty - which started in May 2004 and was due for completion in October 2008, but is still unfinished.

The project has run 拢93.6m over its initial budget of 拢142.1m, and under the terms of the contract the contractor is liable for the first 拢50m of that overrun, with the liability for the remaining cost to be determined between the contractor and the Ministry of Defence.

Amec was originally sole contractor for the jetty. Morgan Sindall acquired Amec鈥檚 construction business for 拢26m in 2007, which had been part of the team working on the job. This left the project a 50:50 joint venture between Morgan Sindall and the remaining independent Amec business.

Amec has been engaged in a long-running battle with the MoD of the extent of its liability for the cost overruns under the contract.

In 2010, an adjudication decision ruled that Amec was liable to pay costs that exceeded the 拢50m cap, but that liability was 鈥渓imited to actual costs properly incurred in excess of that figure鈥�.

That decision was challenged by Amec last year, with Amec arguing it was entitled to paid 鈥渁ny costs however so incurred once the maximum price plus 拢50m was exceeded鈥�, with the MoD arguing it 鈥渉ad no liability at all or, alternatively, a liability limited to actual costs reasonable and properly incurred鈥�.

Last October the Disputes Resolution Board (DRB) ruled that MoD was liable for costs beyond the 拢50m cap that were 鈥渞easonably and properly incurred鈥� - a decision that was then appealed by Amec.

However, the High Court has now refused permission for Amec to appeal the DRB鈥檚 ruling, with the decision stating that if the MoD was made liable for 鈥渁ll costs, however so incurred鈥� beyond the 拢50m cap, then Amec would 鈥渘ot be liable for the costs caused by its own breaches of contract鈥�.

The decision leaves Amec and the MoD to settle on what costs were 鈥渞easonably and properly incurred鈥� over and above the 拢50m cap.

According to the judge鈥檚 decision, the original contract value of the project was around 拢89m, which rose to 拢142.1m. But that then rose again to 拢235.7m - 拢93.6m over the current agreed maximum price and 拢146.7m over the original agreed maximum price.

Morgan Sindall declined to comment.

Amec said it was working with the MoD to bring the project to a 鈥渟uccessful conclusion in the very near future鈥�.

The MoD said it was working with Amec to complete the project 鈥渁s soon as possible鈥� and it was 鈥渁nticipating handover in the coming months鈥�.