Hmmm, I don't think the receivable has been recognised yet as...

Hmmm, I don't think the receivable has been recognised yet as the revenue hasn't been recognised yet (given their adoption of IAS11): http://www.iasplus.com/en/standards/ias/ias11

I think the key paragraph indicating what NWH have adopted is:
"If the outcome cannot be estimated reliably, no profit should be recognised. Instead, contract revenue should be recognised only to the extent that contract costs incurred are expected to be recoverable and contract costs should be expensed as incurred. [IAS 11.32]"

If the amount in dispute (as per Macquarie analyst report) is $80-100m, then I would think this is the value of work done by NWH in excess of the $620m original contract value. I would have thought that any variations would need to have been agreed/signed off along the way by Samsung... but if not, then NWH would take a bath on their additional expenses (which would be slightly less than the $80-100m as that value range would include their margin)...

So the worst case I see is NWH booking nil margin on the original contract value, and also can't claim/recover the additional work done. The project seems to have been about 90% complete at 31 Dec. But of course if NWH do have unbooked margin on the original contract, and can recover X% of the dispute sum, then things are looking much better - ie. if the dispute value is (midpoint) $90m and margin is 7%, and they're able to recover $43m of the dispute (X = 48%), then by my reckoning the contract could be break-even. It's very difficult to assess as there are at least 3 key variables ... giving a very wide range of outcomes!

PoorCharlie