Search results

Arbitration is at the forefront of construction dispute resolution techniques in Palestine. This paper critically examines the historical development of arbitration and explains the recent evolution of construction arbitration in Palestine. This research depends on 12 semistructured interviews with senior arbitrators. It also draws on a thorough examination of relevant documents such as legal instruments, court cases, legislation, and arbitration clauses in standard forms of construction contracts. The study identifies the conditions that assisted the recent growth in the use of construction arbitration, such as the overhaul of legal infrastructure in the form of modern legislation governing arbitration procedure and court proceedings, the provision of contractual infrastructure in the form of widespread incorporation of arbitration clauses in construction contracts, the establishment of institutional infrastructure in the form of arbitration institutions, and the build-up of qualified construction arbitrators. The study also uncovers the barriers that preclude construction arbitration from reaching its next level and thriving, such as lengthy court enforcement proceedings, the reluctance of some international organizations to participate in arbitration seated in Palestine, and the relatively high arbitration costs.

This review paper is the first synthesis of both theoretical literature and empirical research related to construction arbitration decision making. It reveals a lack of theoretical consensus on the underlying ideology that should guide arbitrators in rendering awards. It demonstrates that the available thin empirical research provides mixed evidence. While there is a reason to tentatively believe that there is a growing trend to follow the "legal model" in rendering arbitral awards, the results of the existing studies are far from conclusive and much more remains to be done. Therefore, this paper argues that there is a pressing need for further empirical research to unlock the black-box of arbitral decision making. To do so, this paper calls scholars to steer away from the positivistic paradigm and move closer to the grassroots level by endorsing more interpretivist qualitative research.

Purpose: The standard forms of construction contract are receiving greater attention in the management of projects scholarship as they probably influence the project success and project disputes. The extant literature suggests that the standard forms of construction contract are one of the top sources of disputes. The purpose of this paper is to examine the effectiveness of the standard forms of construction contract, FIDIC and NEC, in reducing disputes in the Palestinian construction industry. Design/methodology/approach: The researchers have used qualitative methods to collect data and more specifically have undertaken 12 semi-structured interviews. Findings: The study reveals that the standard forms of construction contract can be a tool to minimise disputes, but certainly not to eradicate them, and NEC appears to be more capable than FIDIC to do so. Originality/value: This study contributes to knowledge by bringing an industrial perspective into the role of standard forms of contract in disputes creation and avoidance. The interviewees, recurrent users of FIDIC contract, criticised certain features and expressions and proposed some solutions.