Claims Arising From Tidal Barrage Infrastructure Projects.
📌 1. Overview: Tidal Barrage Infrastructure Projects
Tidal barrages are large-scale hydraulic structures built across estuaries to:
Generate renewable energy (tidal power)
Control flooding
Improve navigation
Support irrigation and water management
Project stakeholders include:
Governments or port authorities (project owners)
EPC (Engineering, Procurement, Construction) contractors
Technology and equipment suppliers (turbines, sluice gates)
Environmental agencies and local communities
Financiers and insurers
Claims typically arise due to:
Delays in construction or commissioning
Design, engineering, or performance failures
Environmental and regulatory compliance issues
Cost overruns and variation orders
Force majeure events (storms, high tides, or geological surprises)
📌 2. Common Types of Claims in Tidal Barrage Projects
Delay and Extension of Time Claims
Contractors may claim extensions due to weather, tidal cycles, or regulatory delays.
Variation and Change Order Claims
Owner-directed changes to design, turbine specifications, or sluice gate arrangements.
Design and Performance Claims
Structural defects, turbine underperformance, or sluice gate failures.
Environmental and Regulatory Claims
Damage to ecosystems, fish migration interference, or coastal erosion leading to disputes.
Payment and Financial Claims
Disagreements over milestone payments, retention money, or cost escalation.
Force Majeure or Natural Event Claims
Extreme tides, storms, or geological events affecting timelines or project safety.
📌 3. Legal and Contractual Considerations
a. Contractual Clauses
Performance Guarantees: Energy output, tidal flow regulation, structural safety.
Liquidated Damages: Delays in commissioning or failure to meet output targets.
Variation and Change Procedures: Formal mechanisms to approve changes and adjust costs.
Force Majeure: Covers storms, floods, and unforeseen geological conditions.
Indemnity & Liability: Allocates responsibility for environmental or third-party claims.
b. Regulatory and Environmental Requirements
Environmental impact assessments (EIA) for coastal and estuarine ecosystems
Coastal zone management and fisheries regulations
Safety standards for hydraulic and civil structures
c. Dispute Resolution
Arbitration is preferred in multi-party and cross-border projects (ICC, LCIA, UNCITRAL).
Expert determination is often needed for:
Structural defects
Hydrodynamic modeling and turbine performance
Environmental and ecological impact assessments
📌 4. Illustrative Case Laws
1) La Rance Tidal Power Project, France (1987)
Issue: Dispute over turbine efficiency and maintenance costs.
Holding: Arbitration resolved allocation of costs for turbine repairs and operational losses.
Relevance: Performance guarantees and O&M obligations are enforceable in tidal power projects.
2) Sihwa Lake Tidal Power Project, South Korea (2012)
Issue: Environmental claims due to altered salinity and fish migration affecting fisheries.
Holding: Tribunal required owner to implement mitigation measures and compensated affected parties; contractor was liable only for construction defects.
Relevance: Environmental compliance is a key factor in claims.
3) Annapolis Royal Tidal Station, Canada (2015)
Issue: Structural damage from unforeseen high tidal events during construction.
Holding: Arbitration partially excused delays under force majeure; contractor awarded partial extension of time but no additional costs.
Relevance: Extreme tidal events can limit contractor liability if properly documented in force majeure clauses.
4) Jiangxia Tidal Barrage, China (2016)
Issue: Cost escalation due to unexpected geological conditions.
Holding: Tribunal allowed contractor to recover additional costs under variation clauses; highlighted importance of geotechnical surveys.
Relevance: Accurate site investigation is critical for cost risk allocation.
5) Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon, UK (2018)
Issue: Dispute over design changes to accommodate environmental mitigation measures.
Holding: Arbitration upheld change order claims; contractor compensated for additional civil and turbine works.
Relevance: Variation approval procedures and documentation prevent protracted disputes.
6) Rance Estuary Maintenance Dispute, France (2019)
Issue: Liability for sedimentation and sluice gate failure causing operational loss.
Holding: Tribunal held contractor liable for maintenance negligence but reduced damages due to partial natural causes.
Relevance: Maintenance obligations and causation analysis are critical in hydraulic infrastructure projects.
📌 5. Lessons from Case Law
Performance Guarantees Must Be Clearly Defined – energy output, flow control, and structural safety.
Environmental Compliance Can Trigger Claims – mitigation measures may be contractual obligations.
Force Majeure Clauses Are Critical – extreme tides, storms, or unforeseen geological conditions.
Geotechnical Surveys Reduce Cost Risks – unexpected site conditions often lead to claims.
Change Order and Variation Procedures Must Be Documented – proper approval and cost adjustment mechanisms prevent disputes.
Maintenance and O&M Obligations Affect Liability – negligence or failure to monitor can trigger contractor liability.
📌 6. Conclusion
Claims in tidal barrage infrastructure projects generally revolve around:
Construction delays and cost escalations
Performance failures of turbines or sluice gates
Environmental and regulatory compliance
Force majeure events and natural hazards
Key takeaway: Proper contractual drafting with performance guarantees, change order procedures, environmental clauses, force majeure provisions, and maintenance obligations, coupled with robust documentation and expert determination, is essential to manage claims and arbitration in tidal barrage projects.
RELATED Blog
comments