The supplier rejects responsibility for the delay. You are convinced that it is his, but what you have in your hands are four months of emails, partial minutes and no orderly history.
The evaluation of technical claims is used to reconstruct the sequence of facts from the order documents, verify whether the dispute holds up on a technical level and put in writing deviations, evidence and technical responsibilities.
In a technical dispute, the parties rarely lie. More often they remember different things, in a different order, and each in good faith. What decides is not who is right on the merits, but who manages to demonstrate the sequence of facts with documents produced when the facts happened.
A delay almost always has several competing causes: a material that arrived late, a modification requested during construction, an approval that remained at a standstill, a process that was redone. Attributing it entirely to a part is easy in words and difficult to sustain. When the delay concerns a complex supply, the reports produced during industrial expediting provide a chronological basis already verified, with milestones, criticalities and actions required from the supplier.
Part of our job is to tell the customer that his challenge, on a technical level, does not hold up. It's an uncomfortable but useful outcome: knowing in advance that a position is weak allows you to negotiate instead of aggravating a dispute that will cost more than it can yield. The evidence collected during industrial technical inspections also helps to establish when a non-conformity was already detectable, who was informed about it and how it was handled.
When the matter passes to the lawyers, the technical reconstruction becomes the material on which they work. If that material does not exist, it is built quickly, under pressure and by those who do not know the sector. When the dispute arises from a derogation, an ambiguous specification or a choice made in the course of work, industrial technical consultancy also makes it possible to reconstruct the rationale of the decision and the alternatives available at that time
A delay, non-compliance or a procedure not complied with does not automatically attribute all the costs incurred to the counterparty. It is necessary to demonstrate what concrete consequence they have produced on the order. It is this step that transforms a technical survey into a truly sustainable position.
We work with EPC contractors, plant and component manufacturers, oil and gas and petrochemical companies, energy operators, shipyards, railway companies and metalworking companies. The roles involved are project managers, project managers, technical directors, quality managers and procurement managers, often together with the internal legal department or external legal consultant.
Memories, selected emails, beliefs
It is discovered by treating, often too late
Delay is attributed in bulk
To be built under pressure, by those who do not know the sector
It stiffens, because no one can prove anything
Documented sequence of events, with precise references
Verified before exposing, including weaknesses
Concurrent cases are separated and weighed individually
Ready-made, in the correct technical language
It moves on to the facts, where an agreement is more achievable
A dispute is weakened when it is based on memories, isolated emails, and attributed responsibilities without a verifiable history. The evaluation of technical claims reconstructs the sequence of facts, links each deviation to its consequences and verifies which responsibilities are really supported by the evidence of the order.
It is a formal request made by one of the parties to a supply contract when it considers that the other has not complied with what has been agreed: time, technical requirements, performance or method of execution. Unlike a simple verbal dispute, the claim is presented with contractual references and with an indication of the required consequences. Its durability depends almost entirely on the quality of the technical and documentary evidence on which it is based.
A non-conformity is a technical finding: an element that does not comply with the specification. On its own, it does not generate a claim. It becomes a claim when it produces a contractual consequence — a delay, an additional cost, a performance not achieved — and when one of the parties asks the other to answer for it. The decisive step is the demonstrability of the link: it is not enough that the non-conformity exists, it is necessary to be able to document that it has caused that specific effect. This is exactly where most of the disputes weaken.
Document management operates during the order: it prepares, verifies and keeps the documentation in order while the activities are in progress. The claim evaluation operates a posteriori and with a different purpose: it uses those same documents, together with contracts, timelines and correspondence, to reconstruct what happened and establish where there was a deviation. The link between the two services is direct: the quality of document management determines how much it is possible to reconstruct afterwards. Poorly documented orders are also the most difficult to defend.
No. We are not a law company, we do not provide legal advice, we do not represent the client and we do not comment on the outcome of a dispute. Our intervention is technical and documentary: reconstructing the facts, verifying compliance with specifications and standards, identifying and documenting deviations. The result is delivered in a form that can be used by your lawyer or by the internal legal department, which remain the only ones to evaluate the legal aspects of the matter. In practice, we often work in parallel with them.
The starting point is the contract with its technical specifications, together with the timeline and purchase orders. Then there is evidence of execution: inspection and test reports, supply documentation, open non-conformities, reports and technical correspondence between the parties. It is not essential that the material is complete or tidy. In most cases it is not, and tidying it up is part of the job. What is needed is that it is authentic and fully available, including the unfavorable parts.