header-logo header-logo

Dodgeball

29 May 2015 / Martin Burns
Issue: 7654 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Profession , ADR
printer mail-detail

Don’t resolve disputes, avoid them, says Martin Burns

Transport for London (TfL) and the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) have developed a practical conflict avoidance and early intervention procedure for construction and engineering contracts, which is designed to save money and preserve commercial relationships.

Disputes on major construction and engineering projects can cause immense harm to long term relations between employers and contractors.

Resolving a dispute is more difficult when a difference of opinion between an employer and contractor is not addressed early. In such circumstances parties frequently descend into the trenches. Their views become rigid and, in many cases, parties become so manifestly inflexible that meaningful dialogue is almost impossible.

Traditional methods for resolving disputes can be very expensive and inordinately slow. The commercial and human consequences of litigation, arbitration and adjudication can often be intolerable. This is usually the case even when parties manage to settle their differences before a judgment; award or decision has been given on a dispute.

Avoidance v resolution

In respect of major infrastructure projects, particularly those which

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll