In the construction environment, claims are not exceptions; they are developments inherent to a system that operates at the limits of scope, schedule, and cost. As noted by Takemoto and Quintão (2016), the causes that give rise to claims are usually technical (such as design flaws or incomplete documentation), managerial (changes during execution, divergence between expectations and the contract), or even structural (such as pressure to submit proposals with unrealistic prices and inflexible deadlines).
In this context, claims emerge as manifestations of accumulated imbalances, often not anticipated by the contractual structure or project management. When poorly managed, they turn into prolonged and costly disputes that can harm business continuity and reputation.
The analysis of claims requires a structured contract administration system capable of accurately recording the project’s relevant events and maintaining full traceability of decisions, work orders, communications, and technical occurrences. Thus, it is not enough to have records — it is essential to ensure that these records are organized, accessible, and formally validated by both parties. Meeting minutes, daily construction logs, formal emails, letters notifying changes, and supporting documents must form a linear set that cohesively tells the entire “life story” of the contract and the project. Without this documentary foundation, impact analysis and technical justification weaken, leaving the company vulnerable to conflicts and disputes.
This is where the legal department plays a strategic and preventive role. Contract administration, when integrated from the earliest phases of the project, contributes directly to the project’s contractual maturity. It participates in defining clauses that anticipate and regulate the treatment of extraordinary events, guides managers on the importance of continuous formalization, and actively takes part in structuring recording processes.
And in cases where claims are initiated, the legal department takes a leading role in the technical analysis of documents, in establishing the causal link between event and impact, and in representing the company in negotiation, arbitration, or judicial proceedings. Contract administration thus becomes not only a control instrument but also a technical and legal defense tool for the project.
It is important to emphasize that claim prevention must be understood as a structural component of contract management, not as an isolated stage. According to the Project Management Institute (2003, p. 129), the prevention process relies on three essential inputs: the project plan, the contractual terms, and the risk management plan.
Detailed scope definition, a clear description of the execution method, and proper allocation of risks between the parties — in accordance with their ability to control them — are factors that, when well organized, anticipate potential sources of conflict and reduce contractual uncertainty. The absence of a well-structured risk plan or contractual clauses that anticipate impact events with adequate response mechanisms can not only hinder claim resolution but also be their direct cause. The maturity of these instruments is, therefore, directly proportional to the company’s ability to prevent disputes and protect its interests.
Claims should not be interpreted as irreversible failures, but as opportunities for correction and maturation of contractual relationships, provided they are properly managed.
Companies that adopt a culture of contractual governance, with effective participation of the legal department in all phases of the project, develop greater risk predictability, build a reliable technical record, and gain stronger negotiation power in the face of adversities.
In a sector where time and reputation are worth as much as the budget, structuring claim management ensures operational solidity and confidence across the supply chain. How has your organization handled contractual conflicts? Is it prepared to respond with accuracy, technical rigor, and security?
TAKEMOTO, Henrique Augusto; QUINTÃO, Heider Cristian de Moura. Metodologias para Análise de Pleitos. In: ALVES, Filipe Bonaldo et al. Pareceres de Engenharia: Gestão de Contratos e Pleitos. São Paulo: AACE Brasil, 2016.
MONTEIRO, Rafael Gonçalves; DAHER, Vinicius Oliveira. Omissão e Rastreabilidade de Registros de Eventos Impactantes. In: ALVES, Filipe Bonaldo et al. Pareceres de Engenharia: Gestão de Contratos e Pleitos. São Paulo: AACE Brasil, 2016.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE. Construction Extension to A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. Newton Square: Project Management Institute, 2003.
