Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorUdechukwu Ojiako
dc.contributor.authorMaxwell Chipulu
dc.contributor.authorAlasdair Marshall
dc.contributor.authorHamdi Bashir
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-31T23:28:07Z
dc.date.available2022-01-31T23:28:07Z
dc.date.issued5/1/2021
dc.identifier.other%28ASCE%29LA.1943-4170.0000456.pdf
dc.identifier.urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4269774
dc.description.abstractWithout conclusive settlement of disputes, uses of public sector infrastructure projects as public policy instruments might risk impeachment. With this in mind, we set out in this study to explore how public policy impacts the finality of dispute resolutions conducted within public sector infrastructure project spaces. We used empirical data obtained from opinion coding of 220 decided disputes conducted in the United Arab Emirates between 1992 and 2018. Findings suggest differences in attitude among the courts in the United Arab Emirates in the interpretation and application of public policy as a basis for nullifying arbitral awards. This finding suggests that the existence of a series of parallel courts, a mixed legal jurisdiction, and multiple and concurrent intranational laws, combined with the intractable nature of public policy, can significantly impact the conclusive settlement of public sector infrastructure project disputes.
dc.publisherASCE
dc.titlePublic Policy and Projects: Impact of Intranational Jurisdictional Concurrency on Construction Disputes
dc.typeJournal Paper
dc.journal.volume13
dc.journal.issue2
dc.journal.titleJournal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
dc.identifier.doi10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000456
dc.journal.fristpage04521005-1
dc.journal.lastpage04521005-12
dc.page12
dc.treeJournal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction:;2021:;Volume ( 013 ):;issue: 002
dc.contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record