Session 3 of the 2024 ICC-FIDIC Conference International Construction Contracts and Dispute Resolution was an Oxford-style debate on the issue “This house believes that dispute boards represent unnecessary cost and should be abolished”. Speakers: Danna Er (余惠莉)(다나), Charles Nairac, Engy Serag, Nicholas Turner, and Chair Taner Dedezade. Arguments raised were: ✔️ It is important that we appoint the dispute board at the very beginning of the project. The board starts to point out the problems before they even arise, so they can be resolved. ✔️ Dispute boards offer the flexibility that other dispute resolution mechanisms don’t offer. They encourage professionalism, offer a quick solution, promote open communication and transparency, and maintain good relationships across the board. ✔️ Dispute board members bring with them expertise, and dispute board decisions are informed by their expertise. Appointed at an early stage, dispute boards have intimate knowledge of the project, meaning that parties will take less extreme positions, and will accept the decision.” The fourth panel talked about the topic of Efficient Use of Experts and other case Management: Best practices in Construction arbitration and had Peter Anagnostou, Ellen Alexandra Wong, and Peter Rosher as speakers. To remember from this session 👇 ✔️ As a general rule, it is helpful to appoint experts early. However, you should try to nail the exact right time to involve an expert. For delay, it is helpful to appoint a delay expert after some relevant evidence is gathered. ✔️ A good expert would be experienced and confident, but not brave. The ideal expert should not overreach or attempt to tell the whole story on the project. ✔️ To allow experts to give their best evidence to the Tribunal, it is helpful to (1) provide them enough time to analyse the documents, and (2) have experts from both parties find grounds for agreement. ✔️ While discussing analysis methodology with experts can be helpful, such discussion should answer questions. One has to be careful not to have a theological discussion ‘for the sake of discussing’. Keep in mind that as the analysis progresses, you will inevitably find inconsistencies in the evidence or new details that can change your analysis. ✔️ When both parties are not on equal footing with their expert with, for example, one side having an excellent expert and the other having no expert, a Tribunal may opt for a Tribunal-appointed expert. ✔️ Hot-tubbing can achieve a lot in a short time. It is a helpful way for the Tribunal to hone into certain issues, and both parties can understand what the Tribunal is thinking and address said issues. After the sessions, the participants could focus on networking while enjoying some refreshments. 🤝 What an inspiring day it has been… and #ICCFIDIC isn’t over yet. Follow our social media channels for more updates tomorrow! FIDIC - International Federation of Consulting Engineers
-
-
-
-
-
+3