Evolution of Claim and Dispute Resolution Mechanism in FIDIC 1987, 1999 and 2017

Abstract

By looking at the changes in the formation and structure of the claims and dispute resolution mechanisms in the FIDIC contracts, 1987, 1999 and 2017, it is shown that no attempt has been made to improve procedural lethality and neutrality in managing construction disputes. This research critiques the shift from the refinement of arbitration to the launch of Dispute Adjudication Boards (DAB) in FIDIC 1999 and further to the intricate Dispute Avoidance/Adjudication Boards (DAAB) in FIDIC 2017. In this work, the analytical approach is qualitatively based. It comprises the documentary content analysis of the three editions of the document, assisted by the thematic and sentiment analysis of the software NVivo in interviews with experts. It is suggested by the study's results that the first guidelines were formed by FIDIC 1987, but they were neither detailed nor efficient, and the dispute remained inefficient. The main drawbacks of DABs remain in the two issues relating to enforceability and jurisdiction. So, there was an application of DABs not only for FIDIC 1999 but with FIDIC 1999 introducing enhanced principles of dispute resolution. Introducing the DAAB in 2017, these mechanisms have been further improved to contribute to the industry's corporate spirit, which is aligned with current times. Expert sentiment analysis of these advancements includes procedural guidelines and effectiveness of DAABs, limitations of jurisdictional flexibility, notice scenario, and cost-effectiveness. Finally, the last section discusses the ideas for improved regional flexibility in FIDIC frameworks and the international construction industry through relevant and highly advanced technological use of suitable techniques for key stakeholder groups.