2012-10-29 Can Adjudication Assist AD in Achieving Its Estidama Goal
Embed Size (px)
Transcript of 2012-10-29 Can Adjudication Assist AD in Achieving Its Estidama Goal
Can Adjudication assist Abu Dhabi in achieving its Sustainability (Estidama) goals for the construction industry?
Presentation by: Paul Straker
FCInstCES, FRICS, FICE, MCIArbOctober 2012
October 2012 1
Credit to Others Citations(?)
Kindly note that throughout thispresentation; I cite other eminentprofessionals, by cross reference to abibliography at the end of thepresentation notes(?).
October 2012 2
October 2012 3
October 2012 4
(3)The ICES survey 2012on Dispute Resolution!
October 2012 5
How do these 3 relate?
October 2012 6
October 2012 7
I assert that Adjudication can significantly assist Abu Dhabi in
achieving its Estidama(sustainability) goals for the
October 2012 8
The results of the ICES disputeresolution survey for Abu Dhabi2012, support my assertion!
October 2012 9
First some background information.
An Overview of Adjudication,Estidama & key findings from thedispute resolution survey.
October 2012 10
What is Adjudication?
A process whereby the [neutral third party]
adjudicator who may not be a lawyer has to
reach a decision on matters referred to him
[by] the complaining party. (1.1)
October 2012 11
Who is the Adjudicator?
Either a single suitably qualified andexperienced person / adjudicator.
Or a dispute adjudication board (DAB),comprising of 3 suitably qualified adjudicators.
Appointed as a standing adjudicator/DAB atcommencement of the project; or on an ad-hoc basis; by the parties to the contract.
October 2012 12
What is an Adjudicators Decision?
After a dispute (rejection of a clearly definedclaim) has been referred to the adjudicator for hisdecision thereon.
The adjudicator, acting fairly and impartially, shalladopt suitable procedures, to make his reasoneddecision within a limited time (usually 3 months).
The adjudicators decision will be contractuallybinding; unless and until revised in an amicablesettlement or an arbitral award.
October 2012 13
What are the alternatives? In Abu Dhabi Arbitration is the preferredmethod of dispute resolution!
However, the Abu Dhabi Commercial,Conciliation and Arbitration Center (ADCCAC)also offer Conciliation prior to Arbitration.(3.0)
Other potential options: Negotiation;Mediation; Early Neutral Evaluation; ExpertDetermination; Litigation.
October 2012 14
Dispute Resolution Options The following are the more commonly usedAlternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)methods.
Discussed in order, from simple inexpensivemethods, to the more complex, legalistic andincreasingly expensive methods.
October 2012 15
Negotiation ADR Litigation
Negotiation Theoretically gives the parties most controlover the dispute resolution process.
Without the intervention of a third party: typically consists of a sequence of proposals and counter proposals that continue untilagreement is reached or negotiations breakdown . (1.2)
Negotiations often break down!
October 2012 16
Negotiation contd Heres just one of many reasons; the humanego and lack of negotiating skills: There will be many times that others wouldgladly change their minds and agree with youexcept for one thing:
they have already made a definitecommitment, and cannot change position ingood grace
Skillful persuaders know how to leave the dooropen so that others can escape from theirprevious position without losing face .. (5.0)
October 2012 17
Mediation The least adversarial dispute resolutionmethod; utilizing skilled persuaders!
the facilitation, by a third party, of anegotiated agreement in which themediator does not decide the dispute, butfacilitates communication and problem-solving by the parties.(1.3)
The optimum solution?
October 2012 18
BUT WOULD IT WORK?
Conciliation Utilizes similar techniques to Mediation, except:
Its more formalized; no meetings without bothparties present.
Results in a settlement proposal, made by theconciliator.
Its a means of amicable settlement.
Non-binding on the parties; therefore open tofurther dispute!
October 2012 19
Early Neutral Evaluation Provided by an independent third party: anearly, frank and thoughtful evaluation of therelative positions of the parties ;(1.4)
to enhance the prospects of a successfulnegotiation ;(1.4)
by offering a realistic view of what mighttranspire if a case is fully prepared and tried.(1.4)
October 2012 20
Expert Determination Used where the parties have appointed a thirdparty expert and: submit an issue for thedetermination of a third party .(1.5)
Its used primarily in disputes of a technicalnature which require an opinion on aspecific issue or issues.(1.6)
The parties may agree in advance, to becontractually bound by the determination.
October 2012 21
Adjudication Discussed earlier: internationally proven;used by the Multilateral Development Banks(incl. the World Bank); on projects worldwide. FIDIC MDB Harmonised Construction Contract 2010; andthroughout the FIDIC suite of contracts.
Limited cost, similar to conciliation (typicallybetween 0.2% - 0.5% of construction costs).
Reaches an impartial and contractuallybinding decision; usually within 3 months.
October 2012 22
Adjudication contd The DB procedure amounts to serial adjudication over 90% of disputes referred to a DB will notgo beyond that procedure into arbitration orlitigation .(Dr. Robert Gaitskell QC CEng).(4.0)
Speedy resolution; thereby facilitating the works,enhancing cash-flow and project delivery.
Disposes of the argument, before tensions build;thereby preserving business relationships.
October 2012 23
Arbitration An independent, impartial and finally binding,private dispute resolution process; provenworldwide.
Typically the default method, after the clientsown dispute procedure in the UAE; and thefinal method under FIDIC contracts.
Award is enforceable in many countries(pursuant to the New York Convention); thereforemay be attractive to foreign parties.
October 2012 24
Arbitration contd Takes many months or 1 2 years to reach aresolution.
Formal, adversarial, typically with only oneArbitrator in UAE.
Heard in private; but may still damagebusiness relationships.
Similar cost to litigation; and substantiallymore than any of the foregoing methods.
October 2012 25
Litigation Not a form of ADR, but mentioned here to putADR in context.
Settlement of the dispute through the courts. A judicial process that is finally binding;subject to appeal.
May not be enforceable outside the UAEjurisdiction; therefore may not be attractive toforeign parties.
October 2012 26
May take many months or years conclude.
Costs similar to Arbitration.
Public hearing that may damage reputations.
Can result in a breakdown of businessrelationships.
October 2012 27
October 2012 28
What is Estidama? Estidama is Arabic for Sustainability! But with a difference. It is comprised of 4 fundamental pillars:
October 2012 29
Integration at its core!
Estidama integrates the 4 pillars.
What are its expectations of the constructionindustry?
To achieve significant environmental, social,economic and cultural benefits, while ensuringthat the costs of the development areminimized.(2.1)
October 2012 30
Pearl Rating System for Estidama
A green building rating system.
Launched by ABU Dhabi UPC in 2010.
Mandatory for all construction projects.
October 2012 31
Mandatory and optional sustainability requirements, to achieve:
Minimum One Pearl Rating for all developments.
Minimum Two Pearl Rating for government developments.
The maximum is Five Pearls.
October 2012 32
An essential part of the strategy for achievingEstidama is to fundamentally change the waywe approach design, construction and realestate development.(2.2)
To achieve Pearl Credit Points, under the PearlRating Categories.
October 2012 33
Pearl Rating Categories(2.4)
Integrated Development Process Natural Systems Livable Buildings Precious Water Resourceful Energy Stewarding Materials Innovating Practice.
October 2012 34
Has the potential to benefit fromAdjudication.
Integrated Development Process:
Encouraging cross-disciplinary teamwork todeliver environmental and qualitymanagement throughout the life of theproject.(2.5)
October 2012 35
Has the further potential to benefit fromAdjudication.
encouraging innovation in building designand construction to facilitate market andindustry transformation.(2.6)
October 2012 36
Estidama I propose to you; that Adjudication would bethe most effective dispute resolutionprocedure; for Abu Dhabi, as it: Integrates the team Results in a contractually binding decision Gives a quick solution at moderate cost.
Adjudication achieves Integration and wouldbe regarded as Innovative at present times.
October 2012 37
Implementation Currently the focus of the Pearl rating systemappears to be on design and construction.
The benefits of adopting the most efficientdispute resolution process are not usuallyconsidered.
The UPC could help to facilitate the adoptionof adjudication; by awarding significant creditpoints for its demonstrable and beneficial use.
October 2012 38
An essential part of the strategy for achievingEstidama is to
fundamentally change the way we approach design, constructionand real estate development.(2.7)
October 2012 39
Help yourself to the refreshments.
Please wait until the end of thepresentation before completing thequestionnaire in your folder.
We will continue in 10 minutes!
October 2012 40
Dispute Resolution Survey 2012
Carried out between 14th June 2012 and 14thJuly 2012.
Issued by the ICES, RICS and associatedinstitutions in the UAE.
Specific to the dispute resolution culture inAbu Dhabi.
October 2012 41
Survey Results Generally
Unless stated otherwise; the results in thispresentation, are expressed in terms ofpercentages of the combined results of allrespondents.
Fractions of percentages and the It Dependscategory are not shown, for clarity. Therefore,the sum of the following percentages, doesnot add up to 100% .
October 2012 42
(1) Survey Results
31 survey returns were made by the closing date;comprising:
The detailed results can be viewed now on theICES UAE web site; http://www.cices.org
October 2012 43
Clients - 21%
Contractors - 31%
Consultants - 48%
(2) Project Cost
The majority of our projects cost in excess ofUS$ 100 million (AED 360 million).
October 2012 44
(3) Base Contract A substantial proportion of projects use:
October 2012 45
0% 50% 100%
FIDIC 4th 1987
FIDIC 1999 R&Y
(4) Dispute Resolution Procedures
October 2012 46
DAB or adjudicatoris appointed on anad-hoc basis.
DAB or adjudicatoris appointed atcommencement.
(4) Dispute Resolution Procedures contd
October 2012 47
Employer's ownprocedures are used.
Mediation /counselling is used.
An independentexpert is appointed. Agree
(5) Settlement of Disputes
October 2012 48
The Engineer / CA actsfairly.
The Engineer / CA actsimpartially.
An amicable settlementis reached. Agree
84% of Contractors disagree
64% of Contractors disagree
Majority 42% of Contractors disagree
(5) Settlement of Disputes contd
October 2012 49
Disputes are usuallysettled beforereaching arbitration.
Litigation is thepreferred method.
Arbitration is thepreferred method.
But see later statistics!
(6) Disputes Relate to:
Type of Dispute
October 2012 50
(7) Impact of Disputes
October 2012 51
Increased costs morethan 10%.
Increased costs morethan 5%.
More than 3 monthsdelay.
74% Contractors Agree
85% of Clients Agree
(8) Quicker Settlement of Disputes Would
October 2012 52
Cognizance of previous questions
(9) Effective Methods of Dispute Resolution
October 2012 53
Summing up the Statistics
In my opinion, the key statistics fall under the following heads:
which I suggest are correlated with the dispute resolution procedure in the contract.
October 2012 54
FIDIC contract is used, without the use of theadjudication provisions.
Clients own dispute procedure is mainly used.
Engineer / CA; does not usually act impartially;and sometimes acts unfairly.
The lack of impartiality by the dispute resolver;leads tomistrust; a priceable Risk!
October 2012 55
Disputes mainly relate to: Extension of time. Interpretation of contract. Valuation of variations. Interpretation of drawings & specifications.
Which are all interrelated; resulting in risks totime, cost and quality.
October 2012 56
Cost to the Parties
Projects typically cost more than U.S. $100million.
With delays of more than 3 months; due todisputes.
and increased costs of 5% - 10%; due to disputes. Thats a Substantial Loss!
October 2012 57
Cost to the Environment
October 2012 58
One of the many costs: With an estimated annual construction
expenditure for Abu Dhabi in 2011, of U.S. $100+ billion; funded
substantially from oil revenue, at $80 per barrel; based on the dispute
statistics, this equates to around 100+ million barrels of oil, consumed due
to disputes, in just one year!
Arbitration is not the preferred method.
A quicker settlement of disputes would reducedelays and cost; as well as improving the qualityof design and construction.
Adjudication would be the preferred method forsettling disputes.
October 2012 59
Settles disputes impartially and quickly, whichbuilds trust; resulting in time and cost savings,as well as improved quality.
Is contractually binding, giving certainty.
Achieves Estidamas tenets of Integration andInnovation, at reduced cost; as well as beingthe preferable method of dispute resolution.
October 2012 60
We need not all agree, but if wedisagree, let us not be disagreeable inour disagreements (Martin R.DeHaan).(6.0)
October 2012 61
An essential part of the strategy forachieving Estidama is tofundamentally change (UPC).(2.2)
October 2012 62
Conclusion Does my Hypothesis stand?
Based on my research and the findings of thedispute resolution survey; I maintain myassertion that:
Adjudication can significantly assist AbuDhabi in achieving its Estidama goals!
October 2012 63
End of Presentation
Please return the questionnaire with your opinions; before you leave.
October 2012 64
Your response will form part of an article onthe survey and following CPD presentation; tobe published in the ICES Civil EngineeringSurveyor magazine. This article will also beused as part of my dissertation for a MastersDegree in Construction Law and Arbitration.
October 2012 65
Bibliography Kindly note the following that have been citedthroughout this presentation: (1.0) Crook JA & Betancourt JC, What is AlternativeDispute Resolution (ADR)? (CIArb, London WC1A 2LP,2010). (1.1) Ibid. @ p. 5; citing, Reynolds, Michael et al.Construction Litigation Practice, (Welwyn Garden City, 2000,p.57.
(1.2) Ibid. @ p. 19; citing, Forgas Joseph On Feeling Goodand Getting Your Way: Mood Effects on NegotiatorCognition and Bargaining Strategies, (1998) 74 Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, p. 565.
(1.3) Ibid. @ p. 15; citing, Menkel-Meadow, Carrie, LawyerNegotiations: Theories and Realities-What we Learn fromMediation, (1993) 56 Modern Law Review, p. 372.
October 2012 66
Bibliography contd (1.0) Crook JA & Betancourt JC, What isAlternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)? ; contd (1.4) Ibid. @ p. 5; citing, Levine, David, Early NeutralEvaluation: A Follow-Up Report, (1986) 70 Judicature,p. 237.
(1.5) Ibid. @ p. 9; citing, Jones, Doug, ExpertDetermination in Commercial Contracts in Cato, Mark,The Expert in Litigation and Arbitration (London, 1999),p. 789.
(1.6) Ibid. @ p. 9; citing, Wright, Ian, et al. AlternativeDispute Resolution in Ramsey, Vivian et al.,Construction Law Handbook (London, 2009), p. 905.
October 2012 67
Bibliography contd (2.0) Abu Dhabi Urban Planning Council (UPC),The Pearl Rating System for Estidama, Version 1.0(UPC, Emirate of Abu Dhabi, April 2010). (2.1) Ibid. @ p. 14. (2.2) Ibid. (emphasis added). (2.3) Ibid. (2.4) Ibid. @ p. 1. (2.5) Ibid. (2.6) Ibid. (2.7) Ibid. @ p. 14. (emphasis added). (2.8) Ibid.
October 2012 68
(3.0) Abu Dhabi Commercial Conciliation andArbitration Center (ADCCAC), ProceduralRegulations 2005.
(4.0) Gaitskell R QC, Trends dispute resolution inthe credit crunch (Construction Law InternationalJournal, Vol. 6, issue 3, October 2011) @ p. 6-12.
October 2012 69
(5.0) Giblin L, The Art of Dealing With People(Embassy Books, Mumbai 400 023, 2001); at p. 48.
(6.0) Taddeo D, Notable Quotables 3,000Quotations from A to Z (Creation House Press,Florida 32746); at p. 39.
October 2012 70
DisclaimerThis survey and/or presentation material may not beused for any commercial purposes whatsoever. Theopinions expressed in this survey and/orpresentation, do not necessarily reflect the views ofthe Chartered Institution of Civil EngineeringSurveyors (ICES), its Council of Management orother committees or members, or those involved inconducting the survey. No material may bereproduced in whole or in part without the writtenpermission of the ICES.
October 2012 71