The Structural Engineer > Archive > Volume 72 (1994) > Issues > Issue 7 > ADR: Why Treat the Symptom, not the Cause?
Name of File 5747-72-07.pdf cached at 14/12/2017 02:28:00 - with 3 pages. pdfPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\97\9713a2a4-7293-416c-9583-240ecbcd2fec.pdf. thumbPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\pdfthumbs\9713a2a4-7293-416c-9583-240ecbcd2fec_1.png. objDoc: 1 - True. objPreview.Log: . strFileName: 9713a2a4-7293-416c-9583-240ecbcd2fec_1.png

Members/subscribers must be logged in to view this article

ADR: Why Treat the Symptom, not the Cause?

Structural engineers appointed as the engineer on civil engineering contracts have sought to maintain a fair and independent approach to differences that arise on site. The quasi-arbitral duties called for in those contracts can no longer be performed. In order to ensure the early resolution of disputes and thereby save the parties‘ costs, it is essential to introduce a form of mediation that provides for the regular intervention of neutral persons to assist in the resolution of disputes during the course of the works. Three processes are advocated - a board of three members for large and complex projects; an advisor for the less complex; and a mediator on call where retention throughout the works is not justified by the cost. The procedures are incorporated into the contract conditions, and the board or individuals are appointed at the outset of the contract. K. Severn and P.L. Campbell