Skip to main content
Log in

Causes of common and frequent claims in oil, gas and petrochemical projects of Iran

  • Construction Management
  • Published:
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering Aims and scope

Abstract

Over recent years, frequent involvements in claims have been inevitable due to unpredictable economic changes and increasing complexities in construction industry. Therefore, even appropriately made contracts are not exempted from claims. On the other hand, construction contract claims are time-consuming, expense-involving and most likely leading to unsatisfactory results. However, there may be some positive outcomes, such as time extension or compensation of damages. To launch investigations, a list of important and frequent claims in oil and gas industry projects of Iran was extracted after a succinct documents review. Further, the most important claim causes were identified through conducting a questionnaire survey among contractors, consultants, owners and lawyers involved in such projects. Reliability of responses has been examined, accordingly. The study reveals that the external risks like political, social, cultural and economical issues are the most important causes for claims in this industry. Moreover, inadequate financial resources on the part of owner and contractor, failure in performing contractor’s obligations and vague contract conditions resulted in formation of different interpretations; are some of the most important root causes of claims in this context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abd El-Razek, M. E., Bassioni, H., and Abd El-Salam, W. (2007). “Investigation into the causes of claims in Egyptian building construction.” Proc. 23rd Annual Association of Researchers in Construction Management Conference (ARCOM), Belfast, UK, pp. 147–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alkass, S., Mazerolle, M., and Harris, F. (1996). “Construction delay analysis techniques.” Journal of Construction management and economics, Vol. 14, No. 5, pp. 375–394, DOI: 10.1080/014461996373250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Moumani, H. A. (2000). “Construction delay: A quantitative analysis.” International Journal of project Management, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 51–59, DOI: 10.1016/S0263-7863(98)00060-X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blake Dawson Waldron (2006). “Scope for improvement a survey of pressure points in Australian construction and infrastructure projects.” Australian Constructors Association, Sydney NSW, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunni, N.G. (2005). The FIDIC forms of contract, Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, Third Edition, UK.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Diekmann, J. E. and Giraed, M. J. (1995). “Are contract disputes predictable?.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, Vol. 121, No. 4, pp. 355–363, DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1995)121:4(355).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eilenberg, I. M. (2003). Dispute resolution in construction management, University of New South Wales Press (UNSW) Sydney, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jergeas, G. F. and Hartman, F. T. (1994). “Contactors’ constructionclaims avoidance.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, Vol. 120, No. 3, pp. 553–561, DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1994)120:3(553).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumaraswamy, M. (1997). “Conflicts, claims and disputes in construction.” Journal of Engineering Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 95–111, DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-232X.1997.00087.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mapfre, R. E. (2010). Manual on construction risk, damage to the works and advanced loss of profits (ALOP), http://www.mapfre.com/mapfrere/en/cinformativo/other-publications.shtml/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martilla, J. A. and James, J. C. (1977). “Importance-performance analysis.” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 77–79, DOI: 10.2307/1250495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGeorge, D. and Palmer, A. (2002). Construction management: New directions, Wiley-Blackwell Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortaheb, M. M. and Ahmadian, A. (2011). “Identification of business risks in management of infrastructure projects in iran.” Proc. 2nd International Conference on Business and Economics, Tibet, China, pp. 125–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, S. W. (2007). Construction methods and management, Prentice Hall, 8th Edition USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Project Management Institute (2000). Construction extension to a guide to the project management body of knowledge, PMI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins, S. and Judge, T. (2007). Essentials of organizational behavior, Twelfth Edition, Prentice Hall USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos, A. (1999). “Cronbach’s alpha: A tool for assessing the reliability of scales.” Journal of Extension Information Technology, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skene, M. and Shaban, R. (2002). “Strategies to avoid and resolve construction disputes.” Proc. Canadian Construction Association Conference, Vancouver, Canada, pp. 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suryawanshi, C. S. (2010). Analysis of claims based on provisions in 4th edition of FIDIC contracts, Sr. Techno Legal Consultant Mumbai.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, D. M. (1980). The oxford companion to law, Clarendon Press Oxford, p. 227.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. H. Hasheminasab.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hasheminasab, S.H., Mortaheb, M.M. & Ahmadian F. F, A. Causes of common and frequent claims in oil, gas and petrochemical projects of Iran. KSCE J Civ Eng 18, 1270–1278 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-014-0422-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-014-0422-5

Keywords

Navigation