Airport projects are among the most complex infrastructure projects. For the contractor, an airport project entails not only delivering a technically complex scope of works, but also operating in an environment where individual systems, installations and work scopes are closely interdependent, with multiple participants potentially influencing the course of the project.
A problem affecting a single element may impact the ability to carry out subsequent works, the deadline for reaching a milestone or the acceptance of the entire scope of works. An incident that initially appears to be a technical issue can therefore quickly affect the contractor’s contractual position, resulting in additional costs, delays or the risk of contractual penalties being imposed.
Therefore, when advising contractors on airport projects, knowledge of the contract alone is not enough. It is also essential to understand what is happening on site, how the various parties depend on one another, which events call for a contractual response, and which matters are merely requests from future users and which are contractual obligations.
Interdependencies between systems are relevant to the contractor’s claims
It is vital to understand the interdependencies between key systems and installations at the airport, as only then can the contractor comprehensively demonstrate the impact of a given impediment in its claims. An example can be the relationship between the sprinkler system and the BHS.
In practice, a dispute over the amount of costs attributable to a particular obstacle can usually be resolved much more quickly than a dispute in which the contractor must first establish the merits of a position that it was previously unable to persuade the engineer to accept.
Identifying such interdependencies at a sufficiently early stage allows not only for a proper assessment of the contractor’s situation, but above all for the documentation of the obstacle’s actual impact on the continued execution of the works. In the event of a potential claim, it is not only important to demonstrate that a specific event occurred, but also to show its consequences for deadlines, costs or the feasibility of carrying out subsequent scopes of work.
Where the investor’s cooperation is required, a swift response is crucial
It is helpful to identify the areas where the completion of the works will require specific cooperation from the investor and to notify the investor immediately of any obstacles should deadlines (e.g. FIDS) be exceeded.
The fundamental principle of liability is related to exercising due care; therefore, situations in which the contractor was unable to carry out specific tasks even whilst exercising due care do not constitute a delay.
This is particularly important where the contractor cannot complete a specific scope of works on its own. If further progress depends on an action taken by the contracting entity or another party involved in the project, it is important to identify this interdependence and its impact on the schedule accordingly in advance.
Failure to react at the appropriate time may later make it difficult for the contractor to demonstrate that the cause of the delay was beyond its control.
Acceptance stage: additional expectations do not always mean additional obligations
We know how important it is to act proactively during the acceptance stage to ensure that the contractor carrying out a specific scope of works for a particular contracting entity does not become subject to additional expectations from third parties under the contract. Such a situation could bring the project to a standstill for an extended period, causing uncertainty regarding a potential contractual penalty.
In the case of airport projects, the acceptance stage may involve many parties, not just the contractor and the contracting entity. However, the existence of additional expectations does not in itself mean that the contractor is required to fulfil them.
It is therefore essential to determine swiftly what is actually stipulated in the contract and what constitutes a request going beyond the agreed scope. A prolonged lack of resolution may block acceptance whilst simultaneously opening up a debate regarding responsibility for the completion date and any contractual penalties.
Warranty and guarantee require safeguards to be put in place during the execution phase
An airport is the sort of facility where tasks under warranty or quality guarantee can be very time-consuming. It is, therefore, advisable to resolve any ambiguous situations unequivocally during the construction stage. It is also very important to ensure that subcontractors’ obligations are properly secured.
This has very practical implications for the general contractor. The general contractor is liable to the contracting entity for a specific outcome, whilst the fulfilment of certain obligations relating to the rectification of defects or subsequent maintenance may depend on subcontractors.
The more precisely liability issues are regulated and documented whilst the project is still underway, the lower the risk that, following acceptance, the contractor will be faced with an obligation towards the contracting entity which it will find difficult to enforce against the responsible party.
Effective advice requires an understanding of the realities of the project
The role of a legal counsel supporting the contractor is not to replace the designer, engineer or technical expert. However, a legal counsel should understand the technical context of the issue well enough to properly assess its significance for the contract and be able to advise on the optimal solution for the specific circumstances.
Does a particular event affect the contractor’s scope of obligations? Could it have an impact on the completion date? Does it entail additional costs? Does it require the contracting entity’s cooperation? Should it be properly documented with a view to a potential claim?
It is precisely at the intersection of technical and contractual issues that experience from previous projects is particularly valuable. Effective ongoing contractual advice for contractors requires more than just knowledge of the contract; it also requires an understanding of the project to which the contract relates.
With our ongoing legal support, our clients have carried out contracts at airports which, in 2025, handled a total of over 51 million passengers – nearly 80 per cent of all passenger traffic in Poland.
FAQ
When can the contractor claim additional costs or an extension of the time for completion?
The possibility of claiming additional costs or an extension of the time for completion depends on the terms of the contract, the reasons for the hindrance and its actual impact on the progress of the works. It is important not only to demonstrate the occurrence of the event itself, but also to document its consequences for the schedule, costs and the ability to carry out subsequent works. It is also crucial to raise a claim in a timely manner in accordance with the procedures set out in the contract. In the case of airport projects, it is particularly important to take into account the interdependencies between individual systems and scopes of works, which may affect the extent of the delay or additional costs.
What should be done if the delay results from a lack of cooperation on the part of the contracting entity or another party involved in the project?
In such a situation, the contractor should identify the obstacle as quickly as possible, document its causes and inform the relevant parties of its impact on the contract performance. The contractor should specify what actions are necessary to continue the works, who should undertake them and within what timeframe. It is also important to demonstrate whether the contractor could have prevented the delay or mitigated its effects by exercising due care. An early response and proper documentation help to safeguard the contractor’s position in the event of a dispute over liability for missed deadlines or the legitimacy of contractual penalties.
Does the contractor have to meet all the requests raised at the stage of acceptance of an airport project?
Not every request raised during acceptance automatically constitutes an obligation on the contractor’s part. It must be determined on a case-by-case basis whether it arises from the contract, the contractual documentation or other binding arrangements. In the case of airport projects involving multiple parties, additional expectations may also arise from future users or other interested institutions. In such a situation, the contractor should immediately clarify the basis for the request raised and assess whether it falls within the contractor’s scope of responsibility. This helps to minimise the risk of an unjustified extension of the scope of works, a delay in acceptance and the emergence of a dispute concerning contractual penalties.
How can the contractor’s interests be safeguarded in relation to warranty, guarantee and the liability of subcontractors?
Safeguarding the contractor’s interests should begin as early as the stage of concluding contracts with subcontractors and will then continue throughout the project’s implementation. It is important to precisely define the scope of liability for defects, the deadlines for rectifying them, the rules for reporting faults, and the obligations relating to servicing and repairs. The provisions of subcontracts should take into account the contractor’s obligations towards the contracting entity, to the extent that this is legally and contractually justified. It is equally important to document defects, reports and the actions taken. This helps to minimise the risk of a situation where the contractor remains liable to the contracting entity whilst, at the same time, encountering difficulties in enforcing appropriate action or recovering costs from the subcontractor.
