YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    NEC Contracting: Evaluation of the Inclusion of Dispute Review Boards in lieu of Adjudication in the Construction Industry in the United Kingdom

    Source: Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction:;2014:;Volume ( 006 ):;issue: 004
    Author:
    Shane E. Murphy
    ,
    John P. Spillane
    ,
    Caroline Hendron
    ,
    John Bruen
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000147
    Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
    Abstract: The construction industry is renowned for spending vast sums in the resolution of disputes, but never in the prevention. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the New Engineering Contract (NEC) to determine whether or not adjudication has become misaligned with the contract’s objective of promoting effective management. In doing so, the paper examines dispute review boards in order to ascertain if they could be a viable alternative to adjudication. A sequential mixed methodology is adopted including a detailed literature review and eight semistructured interviews, culminating in the circulation and analysis of a questionnaire, to record the significance of the factors identified. The research concludes that the majority of individuals agree that dispute review boards would be more aligned with the NEC. The familiarity of members, the potential to curb rogue behavior of parties, and the proactive nature of the board are flagged as positive features, however the cost aspect requires further investigation. The reservations made in the study about adjudication, such as the priority given to speed over accuracy and also the adversarial nature of the process, suggest that a preventative step prior to proceeding to adjudication would coincide more with the three core themes of the NEC and therefore be a positive addition.
    • Download: (144.9Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Statistics

      NEC Contracting: Evaluation of the Inclusion of Dispute Review Boards in lieu of Adjudication in the Construction Industry in the United Kingdom

    URI
    https://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/79576
    Collections
    • Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction

    Show full item record

    contributor authorShane E. Murphy
    contributor authorJohn P. Spillane
    contributor authorCaroline Hendron
    contributor authorJohn Bruen
    date accessioned2017-05-08T22:23:45Z
    date available2017-05-08T22:23:45Z
    date copyrightNovember 2014
    date issued2014
    identifier other43930704.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/79576
    description abstractThe construction industry is renowned for spending vast sums in the resolution of disputes, but never in the prevention. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the New Engineering Contract (NEC) to determine whether or not adjudication has become misaligned with the contract’s objective of promoting effective management. In doing so, the paper examines dispute review boards in order to ascertain if they could be a viable alternative to adjudication. A sequential mixed methodology is adopted including a detailed literature review and eight semistructured interviews, culminating in the circulation and analysis of a questionnaire, to record the significance of the factors identified. The research concludes that the majority of individuals agree that dispute review boards would be more aligned with the NEC. The familiarity of members, the potential to curb rogue behavior of parties, and the proactive nature of the board are flagged as positive features, however the cost aspect requires further investigation. The reservations made in the study about adjudication, such as the priority given to speed over accuracy and also the adversarial nature of the process, suggest that a preventative step prior to proceeding to adjudication would coincide more with the three core themes of the NEC and therefore be a positive addition.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titleNEC Contracting: Evaluation of the Inclusion of Dispute Review Boards in lieu of Adjudication in the Construction Industry in the United Kingdom
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume6
    journal issue4
    journal titleJournal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000147
    treeJournal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction:;2014:;Volume ( 006 ):;issue: 004
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian