In Summary:
– The company stated that it could not complete the project on March 23 as stipulated in the contract.
– They want the engineer and KPC ordered to grant them extension of time to enable them complete the work.

A firm engaged in construction of a loading facility at the Kenya Pipeline Company (KPC) Eldoret Depot has alleged that it has been denied extension of time to complete the project without any meaningful justification.

Empo Electrical & Mechanical Engineering Company Ltd wants KPC stopped from terminating their contract or entering into a new contract with another firm to complete the said work.

In the suit, the company said it had entered into a contract with KPC on February 26 last year for construction of the facility in Eldoret.

They mobilised the machinery, equipment and labour and moved the same into the site where they commenced the construction of the truck bottom loading facility.

However, on March 10 this year the firm sought extension of time to complete the project as had been provided for in the contract.

The company stated that it could not complete the project on March 23 as stipulated in the contract.

“The grounds of extension were that substantial change of loading requirements which necessitated the manufacture of other materials, which could only be delivered to the site on the first week of May, 2015 given that the time for the manufacture of the said materials is six months,” explained Empo Electrical in their court papers.

Other challenges were that some of the materials were expected to be ready by end of April, 2015. The inclement weather experienced in the month of September, 2014 also led to a loss of two weeks.

The additional evacuation work to remove the contaminated fill at the truck loading point led to a loss of three weeks.

MISCONDUCT

Similarly, hauling of murram was highly affected by the wrangles between two counties since the approved quarry for the murram was in a different county, Elgeyo Marakwet County whereas the works were in the Uasin Gishu County.

“The request for extension of time was exercised by us invoking clause 44.1 of the conditions of contract which in any event provides for the extension on among other grounds the nature of additional work, exceptional adverse climatic conditions among other special circumstances,” said Empo Electrical.

Empo Electrical emphasised that under the conditions of the contract, KPC’s project engineer manager, was obliged under the law and the contract to investigate the said requests and undertake due consultation with them and KPC.

The engineer was also expected to determine the amount of such extension and shall notify Empo Electrical with a copy to KPC, something the engineer failed to do.

“Instead of the engineer undertaking the job as contracted and pursuant to the conditions of contract, the engineer did other things and in a sense engaged in misconduct. He did not undertake any due consultation and in the end rejected the request for extension of time. All the grounds raised in support of the extension of time were brushed aside without any investigation,” Empo Electrical.

Empo Electrical is seeking orders that failure by the engineer to grant them extension of time was against the contract.

They want the engineer and KPC ordered to grant them extension of time to enable them complete the work.