Assessment of complex damages in a dispute between an alloy supplier and aircraft manufacturer.
Following cracking found in parts manufactured for a passenger airliner, the aircraft company alleged that the alloy materials provided were sub-standard and claimed against the supplier for various costs running to several hundreds of millions of dollars.
Brief
The legal counsel for the materials supplier – which contended that its alloys met the client’s specification – retained HKA to provide expert analysis and opinion on the aircraft manufacturer’s complex damages claim.
What we did
The claim comprised costs allegedly arising from investigating the causes of the cracking, developing modifications and methods to fix the problems, and the implementation of these solutions. These losses would amount to hundreds of millions of dollars.
The work done for our initial expert report involved:
- Verifying which historical costs were actually incurred
- Ensuring that these costs related to the alleged defects
- Detailing omissions and weaknesses in the claim’s preparation
Our first joint expert statement agreed the need to analyse a sample of the historical costs claimed and all relevant documentation available to evidence the costs to invoices and payments.
Having shown that a significant proportion of labour and other costs were inflated, unsupported or otherwise unreliable, our damages expert – working with forensic accountant colleagues – also investigated the claims concerning future costs for modifications and refitting of aircraft.
In view of the profound impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the aviation market, it was necessary to question many of the assumptions regarding projected demand for refits.
At the virtual hearing, held during 2020, our expert provided testimony, which included ‘hot tubbing’.
The experts advised the ICC tribunal that preparing a model to help the panel determine the amount of damages would be a complex task due to the many variables and uncertainty involved. It was agreed that this should be deferred until after judgment, to avoid abortive work.
Outcomes
The HKA team identified significant deficiencies in the documentary evidence for the claim and made clear the high level of risk that the projected implementation costs were overstated.
The tribunal found that the alloy supplier was not liable.

"The HKA team identified significant deficiencies in the documentary evidence for the claim and made clear the high level of risk that the projected implementation costs were overstated."
-
ClientConfidential
-
Year2020
-
ValueHundreds of millions (US$)
-
ServicesForensic Accounting & Commercial Damages
-
SectorsIndustrial & Manufacturing, Forensic Accounting & Commercial Damages
RELATED PROJECTS
RELATED PROJECTS

Medical Imaging Joint Venture
Middle East

Franchise Fraudulent Transfer Matter
Americas

Industrial Manufacturing Facility
Europe

Healthcare organization’s COVID cost recovery
Americas

Energy and Telecom Cable Manufacturer
Americas & Asia

Fraudulent billing for security services
Americas & Asia

Labor mischarging on shipbuilding contracts
Americas

Home security company sale agreement
Americas

T-45A Aircraft
Americas

Global chemicals manufacturer
Americas & Europe

Representations and warranty insurance claim arbitration
Americas

Multi-Billion Dollar Automotive Client
Americas

Spent Nuclear Fuel Verdicts & Settlements
Americas

Bankruptcy of drug testing company
Americas

Auto Industry Joint Venture Dispute
Americas

Major Nuclear Plant
Americas

Oil and gas operator bankruptcy
Americas & other jurisdictions

U.S. Based Shipbuilder
Americas

Longview Power Plant
Americas

Port of Long Beach
Americas
Follow HKA on WeChat
关注我们的官方微信公众号
