Decision support system for dispute resolution in construction contracts
- 893 Downloads
- 4 Citations
Abstract
The construction industry has been characterized by an adversarial operating environment that generates disputes and claims due to the infinite complexities of delivering a building or infrastructure project, the multiplicity of organizations and individuals involved, and the magnitude of the funds at risk. Disputes typically start with the difference of opinion regarding claims, which can escalate to conflicts that require some form of legal action. This paper highlights the need of scientific framework for understanding and administratively resolving disputes over contract clauses. Decision Support System is one such tool. An attempt has been made to develop one such system for disputes arising out of variation and deviations clause in Indian construction contracts.
Keywords
construction contracts construction disputes dispute resolution decision support system contract administrationPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- Iyer, K. C. and Banerjee, K. (2001). “Development of decision support system for resolution of contract disputes — A systemic approach.” Proc., Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET 2001), 29 Jul–02 Aug 2001, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA.Google Scholar
- Iyer, K. C., Chaphalkar N. B., and Joshi, G. A. (2008). “Understanding time delay disputes in construction contracts.” International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp.174–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Iyer, K. C., Kalidindi, S. N., and Ganesh, L. S. (2002). Dispute prone contract clauses — A basis for operational flexibility in contract administration, Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management.Google Scholar
- Thomas, H. R. and Smith, G. (1990). “Resolving disputes over contract notice requirements.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE., Vol. 116, No. 4, pp. 738–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thomas, H. R. and Smith, G. (1991). “Legal aspects of oral change orders.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE., Vol. 117, No. 1, pp. 148–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thomas, H. R. and Smith, G. (1995a). “Understanding defective specifications.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE., Vol. 121, No. 1, pp. 55–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thomas, H. R. and Smith, G. (1995b). “Have I reached substantial competition?” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE., Vol. 121, No. 1, pp. 121–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thomas, H. R., Smith, G. R., and Cummings, D. J. (1995c). “Enforcement of liquidated damages.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE., Vol. 121, No. 4, pp. 459–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thomas, H. R., Smith, G. R., and Mellott, R. E. (1994). “Interpretation of construction contracts.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE., Vol. 120, No. 2, pp. 321–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thomas, H. R., Smith, G. R., and Ponderlick, R. M. (1992a). “Resolving disputes based on misrepresentations.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE., Vol. 118, No. 3, pp. 472–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thomas, H. R., Smith, G. R., and Ponderlick, R. M. (1992b). “Resolving contract disputes based on differing site condition clause.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE., Vol. 118, No. 4, pp. 767–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thompson L. J. and Portis, C. T. (1978). “History of evasive contract phrases.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE., Vol. 104, No. 1, pp. 525–537.Google Scholar