Show simple item record

contributor authorNguyen Thi Hoa
date accessioned2022-08-18T12:20:04Z
date available2022-08-18T12:20:04Z
date issued2022/06/23
identifier other%28ASCE%29LA.1943-4170.0000550.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4286445
description abstractInternational construction is a significant element of world trade. In the international construction sector, forms of contract have become necessary and International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) forms of contract have progressively emerged. Since 1999, under FIDIC forms, the dispute adjudication board (DAB) has been empowered to resolve disputes between parties to a contract by making a binding decision. Therefore, enforcement of the DAB’s decision attracts attention from practitioners. In regard to the enforcement of a dispute settlement decision, there are two important international treaties: the Singapore Convention on mediation and the New York Convention on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Thus, the main focus of this paper is a response to the question: Should the FIDIC DAB’s decision be considered as an award to be enforced under the New York Convention 1958 or as a mediated settlement agreement under the Singapore Convention?
publisherASCE
titleConsideration of whether the FIDIC Dispute Adjudication Board’s Decision Should Be Regarded as an Award or as a Mediated Settlement Agreement
typeJournal Article
journal volume14
journal issue4
journal titleJournal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000550
journal fristpage04522016
journal lastpage04522016-8
page8
treeJournal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction:;2022:;Volume ( 014 ):;issue: 004
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record