Search results

In the construction industry, various parties are involved in a project. Consequently, claims and disputes are inevitable in this industry. This paper aims to develop Integrated project delivery (IPD) practices including early involvement of stakeholders and multiparty contracts which its combination with advanced technologies such as blockchain can lead to better dispute management and improve the whole construction process.

Based on literature review, the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) for IPD contacts were identified, and three formats of IPD contracts were selected, and the dispute resolution process of them has been analyzed. Then, based on blockchain review, a conceptual blockchain-based dispute management (BDM) model was generated for ADR in IPD. Model validation was done by an interview. Experts were asked to compare the BDM model with the traditional system regarding the ADR duration.

Analyses of the collected data from the experts demonstrated that the BDM model has better function in terms of time and cost for ADR process when the project is facing serious and considerable number of disputes. The relation between blockchain technology (BCT) and building information modeling (BIM) has been examined through a framework, and the ability of the proposed model for administrating dispute resolution process has been verified using four different scenarios of construction claims that show the system can run successfully.

The current study proposes a truthful model, reliable framework to address the problem of project dispute management in IPD contracts. The system combines the ability to being unchangeable and the reliability characteristics of BCT with informative and automation aspects of BIM together to improve dispute resolution issue in the IPD system.

This paper aims to seek to and understand how civil conflict and international claims inform one another. Does the existence of ongoing civil and international conflicts affect how a government addresses an international claim? The paper builds on existing literature that link international and domestic conflict. However, it suggests that the logic behind civil conflicts may be different from that for international ones as states decide how to deal with any one claim.

The paper posits that states faced with domestic conflicts and additional international claims are more likely to seek to resolve an international claim than those without similar conflicts. It develops a series of hypotheses about the likelihood of claim escalation and peaceful settlement attempts and proceed to test them quantitatively using the Issue Correlates of War data combined with the uppsala conflict data program/peace research institute oslo Armed Conflict Data.

On the one hand, the paper finds support for the argument regarding the difficulty states are faced with when seeking to resolve multiple international claims. On the other hand, it finds that the presence of civil conflicts incentivizes states to resolve international claims either by force or peacefully, suggesting internal violence can both lead to diversionary behavior and attempts at conflict resolution.

The findings have important implications for work considering the complexity of domestic and international conflict linkages.

While many studies of claim militarization and peaceful attempts focus on dyadic and international characteristics, this paper creates a more nuanced understanding of the complexities of this foreign policy decision process.

The dispute resolution process in the construction industry is known for delays in settlement, with some cases even escalating to complex arbitration and litigation. To avoid conflicts turning into disputes, the parties need to be proactive in identifying and resolving conflicts in their nascent stages. It is here that innovative lean construction practices can potentially act as a game-changer to avoid disputes, and this study aims to attempt to understand this phenomenon empirically.

A questionnaire-based empirical study, followed by semi-structured interviews, is conducted to understand the relevance of key tenets of lean principles in dispute avoidance.

Although stakeholders agree on the usefulness and practicality of lean principles in dispute avoidance, the extent of agreement is lesser when it comes to its implementation practicality. Moreover, there is a demographic influence observed on lean tenets such as “open communication”, “stakeholder collaboration” and “constraint identification”.

The results point towards an approach that combines contractual mandate, training and awareness creation to iron out the differences in the usefulness and practicality of lean approaches to avoid disputes.

Lean implementation is widely discussed in many construction contexts, such as sustainability, productivity improvement and planning. However, a discussion on lean philosophy’s role in dispute avoidance is muted. Therefore, this study assumes significance.

Judiciary plays a pivotal role in the overall development of a nation's economy and its involvement assures process transparency and impartiality. However, litigation is often expensive, uncertain and prone to delays. Notwithstanding such inherent challenges associated with litigation, it is observed that parties in construction disputes do resort to litigation. This study attempts to understand the potential paths triggering litigation of contractual disputes in construction. While extant researchers have identified focus areas or factors influencing litigation, the underlying paths connecting these focus areas, leading parties to litigation, is explored in this study.

Considering the framework of Rachlinski's “framing theory of litigation” and the mixed-methods approach (qualitative and quantitative approaches), this study proposes and validates a model that identifies the paths to litigation of contractual disputes in construction.

The results of in-depth interviews, followed by validation through structural equation modelling (SEM), reveal four critical paths, namely positional focus (PF) – contract and dispute characteristics (CDC) – decision to litigate (DTL), milieu influence (MI) – CDC – DTL, MI-PF-DTL and CDC-DTL.

The identified paths highlight the areas policymakers can consider while developing policy interventions to mitigate litigation.

Researchers have identified factors causing litigation in construction. However, attempts to examine the existence of multi-factor “paths” on the decision to litigate (DTL) have hitherto received a muted response, so this study focuses on identifying the project-level path(s) leading to the litigation of contractual disputes in construction.

Contract risk management has become a critical mission, as contract issues may lead to a loss of vast amounts of money to parties involved or cause project failure. This study sought to identify effective management strategies to mitigate construction contract issues that might emerge during construction.

A quantitative research approach was adopted for the study. Structured questionnaires made up of close-ended questions were distributed to construction professionals in South Africa via the SurveyMonkey platform. The data were then analysed using descriptive statistics.

The findings indicate that the critical sources of contract-related disputes are ambiguous definitions of the contract parties' scope of their rights and obligations, lack of precise arrangements regarding the calculation of contractual penalties for failure to meet the deadline, lack of detailed specification of the works and specific milestones, lack of provisions regulating changes to the project documentation during the construction stage, an excessive amount of contractual penalties on contractor's side and lack of provisions regarding the rules of performing additional and replacement works and their settlement. However, for these disputes to be effectively managed, strategies such as reduction uncertainties in project's phases, setting up contingency plans, construction guarantee, extension of time claims, payment guarantee, retention and escalation clause should be implemented by the parties involved.

Even though the empirical study focused on construction professionals in South Africa, the findings could be applied to other countries outside of South Africa.

To effectively manage and prevent contract disputes from averting project failures and losses to parties involved in the contract, construction professionals need to be aware of strategies that must be implemented before and during the project execution. If well implemented, these strategies will help a construction project be successful and experience fewer contractual disputes.

The study has identified the knowledge gap concerning suitable contract risk management strategies available for implementation to effectively prevent any contract parties from losing money, time and project failure.

States have intervened with legislation to improve cashflow within construction project supply chains. The operation of the UK’s Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 leads to payment obligations stated either as a contract administrator’s certificate (or equivalent) or an adjudicator’s decision. The purpose of the intervention would be defeated unless there are speedy ways of transforming these pieces of paper into real money. The combination of the legislation, contractual provisions and insolvency law has produced a minefield of complexity concerning enforcement of payment obligations stated in these documents. Unfortunately, the knowledge and understanding required to navigate these complexities have been sorely lacking. The purpose of this paper is to plug this gap.

Legal research methods and case study approaches, using relevant court decisions as data, were adopted.

The enforcement method advised by the court is the summary judgment procedure provided under the Civil Procedure Rules. An overdue payment obligation, either under the terms of a construction contract or an adjudicator’s decision, amounts to a debt that can be the subject of insolvency proceedings. Although the insolvency enforcement method has been successfully used on some occasions, using it purely as a debt collection weapon would be inappropriate and likely to be punished by the court.

The paper contributes to knowledge in two ways: (i) it maps out the factual situations in which these payment challenges arise in language accessible to the construction industry’s professions; and (ii) comparative analysis of payment enforcement methods to aid decision-making by parties to construction industry contracts. It is relevant to the other common-law jurisdictions in which similar statutory interventions have been made.

This theme will be addressed through main points: Special Nature of Investment Disputes and its methods of peaceful settlement. International legal framework governing Arbitration in investment disputes: A. Multilateral legal framework. B. Bilateral legal framework/Investment promotion and protection agreementsTypes of arbitration in investment disputes. The Egyptian experience in investment disputes arbitration. The National legal framework. Egypt on the map of investment disputes in the world. A case study. Conclusion: Results related to the legal framework regulating investment disputes in Egypt. Results related to The arbitration cases against Egypt.

The researcher investigates the subject of international arbitration in investment disputes in the framework of voluntary theory, which is based on the premise that the satisfaction of people who are addressing the international legal norm is the basis of the same rule. In other words, the basis of international law is based on the satisfaction of the State and other international legal persons Both, and then express or implied consent.

Despite the availability of domestic and regional arbitration mechanisms in Egypt represented by a large number of cases.

The theme for the study primarily on Egypt and the international arbitration of investment disputes, through theoretical and practical study of disputes arbitration which Egypt is a party defendant in which to focus on what was issued in which the provisions of the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes, in an attempt to find out the reasons for the verdicts image released it, where it came mostly against Egypt, and whether these judgments against them in investment disputes due to reasons related to the legal framework of the arbitration process, or for reasons of bodies of arbitration issued by those provisions, or to the defense, which represents the Egyptian party, or to the circumstances Economic and political (which represents the investment climate).

The proposed solutions to improve the conditions and factors surrounding the arbitration disputes that Egypt is waging against foreign investors, whether they are initially alleged or accused of drafting agreements and contracts, through amending the relevant legislation and laws, selecting arbitration bodies and defense bodies.

This paper aims to examine the options available to arbitrators when they suspect money laundering during arbitration proceedings, considering their compatibility with fundamental principles and concepts of arbitration.

Using a doctrinal analysis approach, the paper draws on legal principles, antimoney laundering regulations and relevant literature to explore the topic. It considers relevant international treaties, standards set by the financial action task force on money laundering, cases and arguments from legal analysts and experts.

The paper identifies three options for arbitrators: disregarding suspicions, initiating an investigation or terminating the proceedings. Disregarding suspicions is deemed inappropriate, as it may facilitate the concealment of financial crimes. Initiating an investigation is seen as a preferable option, aligning with the arbitrator’s role and the public interest in nullifying contracts linked to criminal conduct. Terminating the proceedings is not recommended, as it contradicts the principle of natural justice. The paper emphasizes the importance of reasonable grounds for suspicions, notifying the parties, and allowing them to address the concerns.

This paper contributes to the existing literature by comprehensively analyzing the compatibility of these options with arbitration principles and concepts. It underscores the need for clear laws and directives to guide arbitrators in addressing financial crimes within the arbitration process, maintaining a balance between party autonomy and preventing the misuse of arbitration for illicit activities.

In construction projects, underpayments can be recognised as one of the significant drawbacks that impact the success of a project. Research into underpayments is considered ambiguous and provides a limited reflection of the issue, which makes it complicated to trace how it originates in the first place. This study aims to examine the causes that lead to underpayments and develop a holistic synthesis of underpayments for subcontractors in the lifecycle of a construction project.

An open-ended and closed-ended questionnaire was used to collect the data using purposeful sampling with 28 construction stakeholders who ranged from main contractors, subcontractors and others (Small medium enterprises SMEs, Consultancies, Clients etc.). Data collected was analysed to trace drivers and the impact of underpayment and suggested mitigation strategies to be identified whilst viewing the perspectives of a main contractor and subcontractor.

The findings show that the most prominent driver for underpayments is variation disputes followed by cash flow. The research also suggests mitigation strategies such as collaborative working, more robust budget control and early identification of risks as potential remedies to overcome the underpayment issue. The research concludes with a framework that elicits the complexity underlying underpayments for subcontractors in construction projects.

The research evolves the understanding that underpayment is a complex phenomenon, relying heavily on the data/information exchange mechanism between the main contractor and subcontractors. This research provokes the need to understand underpayment further so it can be mitigated.