Show simple item record

contributor authorTimothy Hill
contributor authorColin J. Wall
date accessioned2017-05-08T21:20:55Z
date available2017-05-08T21:20:55Z
date copyrightJuly 2008
date issued2008
identifier other%28asce%291052-3928%282008%29134%3A3%28306%29.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/47934
description abstractHong Kong (under the “One Country Two Systems” Policy, Hong Kong, although an administrative region of the PRC operates a separate legal system, whose roots lie in the English common law system) has a justified reputation for being at the forefront of developments in techniques to avoid and resolve disputes in the construction industry. [This is illustrated by the adoption of the UNITRCAL Model Law by the Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 1996, specific powers given to Arbitral Tribunals under the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 341) including powers to consolidate, and the development of the dispute resolution adviser system. See the genesis, development and future use of the dispute resolution adviser system by Colin J Wall, Hong Kong Society of Construction Law dated November 17, 2004]. However, it has not, to date, seen the widespread adoption of adjudication as a means of resolving disputes. This article examines the history of the use of adjudication in Hong Kong, current trends, and offers some possible reasons for the limited adoption of adjudication.
publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
titleAdjudication: Temporary Binding and Tiered Dispute Resolution in Construction and Engineering: Hong Kong Experience
typeJournal Paper
journal volume134
journal issue3
journal titleJournal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2008)134:3(306)
treeJournal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice:;2008:;Volume ( 134 ):;issue: 003
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record