MAY 08
BREAKOUT SESSION #2
3:30 PM
Breakout Rooms
1.0 DBIA CEH
As Building Information Modeling (BIM) becomes a foundational component of modern project delivery — particularly between design to construction phase model handoffs — its successful implementation is increasingly tied to technical credibility, risk management, and overall project outcomes. Yet too often, BIM is treated as a technical add-on rather than a strategic framework, leading to confusion, duplicated effort, unrealistic LOD expectations, misaligned modeling responsibilities, unclear handoff protocols, and, in some cases, costly disputes.
This presentation brings together real-world litigation experience and examples from the presenter's work as an expert witness in BIM litigation cases in the US and Canada over the last decade. These case studies of BIM failures unfold under legal scrutiny. The session will explore recurring breakdowns in coordination, model reliance, execution planning, structural model integration, and contractual alignment.
This session is designed for professionals across the project lifecycle who want to better understand how collaborative model development intersects to create value, manage risks, and acknowledge legal accountability — and how to implement BIM to strengthen both project outcome
Learning Objectives:
BIM Contract Language Matters – One of the most common failure points in litigation is inconsistency between the prime contract, consultant agreements, and the BIM Execution Plan (BEP). Teams often treat the BEP as a technical document, while contracts as the controlling authority.
Understanding LOD in BIM is critical. – Level of Development / Level of Detail (LOD) misunderstandings are central in many disputes. Teams frequently interpret LOD as a guarantee of completeness, fabrication readiness, or field constructability — when, legally it may simply reflect model maturity for coordination purposes. Overpromising LOD performance can significantly expand exposure.
BIM Risk is more than “Clash Free” – A Clash-Free Model Does Not Eliminate Liability: Many disputes reveal a dangerous assumption: that successful clash detection equals risk mitigation. Disputes consistently distinguish between coordination and design responsibility. A model may be clash-free and still contain design errors, incomplete information, or constructability gaps.
BIM Behavior needs to Match Contracts – Contractors and consultants sometimes unintentionally expand their exposure by informally resolving clashes, adjusting geometry, or approving model changes outside their contractual scope. Disputes examine conduct — not just contract language.
