Alternative dispute resolution for the construction industry

1990 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 270-270
Author(s):  
John W. Gadsby
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Construction Industry ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution

COMPARISION OF ALTERNATIVE CONSTRUCTION DISPUTE RESOLUTION MEASURES

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulrike Quapp ◽  
Klaus Holschemacher
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Construction Industry ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Construction Projects ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Construction Process ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Industry Practice

Construction projects often are particularly susceptible to conflicts due to their long-term character and complexity. In Germany, courts must deal with around 100,000 construction dispute litigations per year. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) can be an alternative to expensive as well as time-consuming litigation and can help to relieve the judicial system. Furthermore, ADR may contribute to the satisfying settlement of a dispute between parties involved in the construction process and thus help to reach construction projects’ completion on time and within budget. Often, ADR mechanisms such as adjudication, mediation, and conciliation will be used. The paper analyzes the development of ADR in Germany in conjunction with European legal aspects. With special reference to the construction industry practice in Germany, various ADR measures and their advantages and disadvantages, as well as the current situation, will be explained. The authors conclude that, although ADR in Germany has experienced an upswing since the 1990s, it is used only to a small extent for settling disputes in construction projects. An increased knowledge about the advantages and disadvantages of different ADR measures in the construction industry would lead to more frequent uses of ADR. That, and a clever and detailed contract design, which helps to avoid conflicts basing on unclear contract contents, could save money and relieve the courts from time-consuming legal proceedings.

A model for proactive mediation of construction disputes

1995 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis T. Hartman ◽  
George F. Jergeas
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Construction Industry ◽  
Cost Reduction ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Construction Disputes ◽  
Area Of Interest ◽  
New Process ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Alternate Dispute Resolution ◽  
Management Contracts

Alternative dispute resolution methods remain an area of interest and study because of the continued increase in the incidence of disputes, be they claims or litigation. Practice in the industry tends to stimulate litigation if negotiation of claims is unsuccessful. At variance with this is the declared preference of construction industry practitioners for mediation over arbitration and for arbitration over litigation. Mediation has had a high success rate when used in construction dispute resolution. The cost of mediation is significantly lower than litigation or arbitration. The probability of the parties to the dispute being able to work together effectively after the dispute has been resolved is higher, and the dispute can be resolved more quickly than by arbitration or litigation. This paper presents the findings of a study undertaken to identify a better process for construction contracting. An essential part of the new process is the use of proactive mediation. Proactive mediation is the use of a mediator prior to a dispute arising to help identify and address potential problems before they become difficult or unsolvable issues. The proposed methodology has been tested through a process which obtained the input of over 60 senior industry practitioners. Key words: mediation, construction management, contracts, claims, cost reduction, alternate dispute resolution, risk management.

Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution

2021 ◽  
pp. 470-491
Author(s):  
Edwin Glasgow QC ◽  
Marion Smith QC
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Construction Industry ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Standard Form ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Industry Standard ◽  
The World ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Resolution Processes

This chapter focuses on alternative dispute resolution (ADR), which is used as a collective description of various methods of resolving disputes other than through the formal adversarial processes of litigation or arbitration. It emphasizes how ADR is now recognized in construction industry standard form contracts that provide for dispute resolution processes. It also mentions courts in the UK and throughout the world that support and actively encourage ADR, specifically in England and Wales that includes ADR as part of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR). This chapter considers the use of ADR to assist in resolving disputes in the construction industry. It concentrates on mediation but also looks at negotiation and early neutral evaluation.

scholarly journals Alternative Dispute Resolution in SMEs in the Construction Industry in Masvingo Urban, Zimbabwe

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-30
Author(s):  
Tafara Herbert Tavengahama ◽  
Nhamo Mashavira ◽  
Takupiwa Nyanga ◽  
Chakanaka Ernest Muchadenyika
Keyword(s):  
Collective Bargaining ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Construction Industry ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Employee Performance

Dispute handling may present particular problems for SMEs. The research explored the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods used in SMEs and their implications on the performance of SMEs in the construction industry in Zimbabwe. The study revealed that collective bargaining and negotiation are the main ADR methods used in the SMEs while conciliation and arbitration are utilized externally at NEC and the ministry of labour. It was also noted that most SMEs do not have established ADR structures and collective bargaining and negotiation had an impact on employee performance.  Collective Bargaining, Conciliation and Adjudication

scholarly journals A Mechanism for Dispute Resolution in the Iranian Construction Industry

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 205-226
Author(s):  
Abdollah Saeb ◽  
◽  
Mohd Suhaimi Mohd Danuri ◽  
Othman Mohamed ◽  
Norhanim Zakaria ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Construction Industry ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Sampling Method ◽  
Survey Questionnaire ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Construction Disputes ◽  
Analysis Process ◽  
Different Sources

If disputes are not resolved promptly, they tend to become prolonged and escalated, creating a more complicated and less manageable scenario. Therefore, in this study, we formulated a mechanism for dispute resolution in the Iranian construction industry based on alternative dispute resolution methods. The formulated mechanism could aid disputing parties in the construction industry to settle their disputes more effectively and enhance dispute resolution methods in construction standard forms. To achieve this goal, we collected qualitative data using semi-structured interviews with 30 experts who were selected via purposive sampling method. We used MAXQDA software to manage and organise complete interview transcripts and facilitate the qualitative data analysis process. The proposed mechanism and guidance were finally validated using the survey questionnaire. Negotiation has equal potential for dispute resolution with different sources, and it is recommended as the first step in dispute resolution with any source. According to the results, we recommend a three-step resolution mechanism as follows: negotiation, a method based on sources of disputes and a hybrid method of adjudication and arbitration (Adj-Arb), as the appropriate mechanism for dispute resolution in the Iranian construction industry. Replacing arbitration with Adj-Arb in construction standard forms will have satisfactory results in resolving construction disputes and reply to growing criticism that arbitration is becoming more like litigation.

scholarly journals A comprehensive review of disputes prevention and resolution in construction projects

2019 ◽  
Vol 270 ◽  
pp. 05012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wesam S. Alaloul ◽  
Mohammed W. Hasaniyah ◽  
Bassam A. Tayeh
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Construction Industry ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Traditional Method ◽  
Construction Projects ◽  
Construction Project ◽  
Comprehensive Review ◽  
Step Process ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
General Step

The construction industry is complex, fragmented, dynamic and involves many parties in an adversarial relationship. This makes disputes almost inevitable in any construction project. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive review of the adopted methodologies in resolving disputes that arise in the construction projects. The paper evaluates and classifies the different methods of disputes resolution. A comparison was conducted between the advantages and disadvantages of each method. The paper distinguishes between the traditional method of disputes resolution; litigation and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods such as arbitration, mediation, med/arb, mini-trial and dispute review board. In conclusion there is no best way to solve all kind of disputes in construction projects, however, a general step by step process of how disputes should be addressed is finally presented.

scholarly journals Dispute Review Board: Concept and introduction to develeoping countries

2009 ◽  
pp. 6-10
Author(s):  
Ming-Lee Chong ◽  
Heap-Yih Chong
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Content Analysis ◽  
Data Analysis ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Construction Industry ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Effective Alternative ◽  
Analysis Approach ◽  
Resolution Method ◽  
The World

Dispute review board (DRB) is an effective alternative dispute resolution method in U.S. construction industry since 1952. Subsequently, this method has implemented in many high profiled projects around the world. However, the concept and procedures of DRB are relatively new in developing countries, namely Malaysia. The paper aims to investigate on the viability of DRB implementation in Malaysian construction industry. Three reputed experts were interviewed, who targeted initially as to their expertise and significant involvements or experiences in dispute resolution. The data analysis was carried out using content analysis approach. The consensus results has confirmed the concepts of DRB and also identified the practicality and barriers of DRB implementation. These qualitative findings have forecasted the trend of DRB practice and created an important insight in dispute resolution for developing countries. It is concluded that an optimistic viable outcome toward DRB has achieved.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document