Operational problems and solutions of statutory complex adjudication: stakeholders’ perspectives

S. Skaik
{"title":"Operational problems and solutions of statutory complex adjudication: stakeholders’ perspectives","authors":"S. Skaik","doi":"10.1108/IJLBE-03-2017-0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose \n \n \n \n \nStatutory adjudication was introduced into the security of payment (SOP) legislation as a fast-track payment dispute resolution process with an express object to facilitate cash flow within the construction contractual chain. After more than a decade of the operation of the regime in Australia and Singapore, it becomes apparent that there are many operational problems that jeopardise the intended object of the legislation, particularly in adjudicating complex payment disputes. The aim of this paper is to explore views of the industry stakeholders regarding some operational problems of statutory adjudication of as well as possible solutions. \n \n \n \n \nDesign/methodology/approach \n \n \n \n \n“Expert interviews” method is adopted to collect the empirical data, involving interviews with 23 practitioners from Australia and Singapore. \n \n \n \n \nFindings \n \n \n \n \nThe study identified many operational problems jeopardising the attainment of the object of the SOP legislation such as bias of authorised nominating authorities, short adjudication timeframes, inadequate regulations of adjudicators, jurisdictional challenges, involvement of courts and lawyers and complex drafting of the legislation. The study also analysed the views of industry experts with regard to the opportunities for improvement in the operation of the SOP legislation such as following the Queensland model as amended, and introducing a legislative review mechanism and establishing a peer review process. It also suggested specific amendments to make the legislation a more user-friendly. \n \n \n \n \nPractical implications \n \n \n \n \nThe implication of this study is a better understanding of the most critical problems inherent in statutory adjudication that need serious consideration by the legislatures and policymakers. In addition, the study also provides some practical measures as suggested by the industry practitioners for each identified problem which may stand as a reliable reference for potential reform in the SOP laws. \n \n \n \n \nOriginality/value \n \n \n \n \nThere is inadequate empirical research conducted to investigate problems in the operation of statutory adjudication. The study provides original empirical findings which become much necessary nowadays in light of the dynamic moves towards law reform in SOP laws, particularly in Australia. The study provides some practical measures as suggested by the industry practitioners for each identified problem which may stand as a reliable reference for potential reform in the SOP laws.","PeriodicalId":158465,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law in The Built Environment","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Law in The Built Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLBE-03-2017-0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose Statutory adjudication was introduced into the security of payment (SOP) legislation as a fast-track payment dispute resolution process with an express object to facilitate cash flow within the construction contractual chain. After more than a decade of the operation of the regime in Australia and Singapore, it becomes apparent that there are many operational problems that jeopardise the intended object of the legislation, particularly in adjudicating complex payment disputes. The aim of this paper is to explore views of the industry stakeholders regarding some operational problems of statutory adjudication of as well as possible solutions. Design/methodology/approach “Expert interviews” method is adopted to collect the empirical data, involving interviews with 23 practitioners from Australia and Singapore. Findings The study identified many operational problems jeopardising the attainment of the object of the SOP legislation such as bias of authorised nominating authorities, short adjudication timeframes, inadequate regulations of adjudicators, jurisdictional challenges, involvement of courts and lawyers and complex drafting of the legislation. The study also analysed the views of industry experts with regard to the opportunities for improvement in the operation of the SOP legislation such as following the Queensland model as amended, and introducing a legislative review mechanism and establishing a peer review process. It also suggested specific amendments to make the legislation a more user-friendly. Practical implications The implication of this study is a better understanding of the most critical problems inherent in statutory adjudication that need serious consideration by the legislatures and policymakers. In addition, the study also provides some practical measures as suggested by the industry practitioners for each identified problem which may stand as a reliable reference for potential reform in the SOP laws. Originality/value There is inadequate empirical research conducted to investigate problems in the operation of statutory adjudication. The study provides original empirical findings which become much necessary nowadays in light of the dynamic moves towards law reform in SOP laws, particularly in Australia. The study provides some practical measures as suggested by the industry practitioners for each identified problem which may stand as a reliable reference for potential reform in the SOP laws.
法定复杂裁决的操作问题与解决方案:利益相关者的视角
法定裁决被引入支付安全(SOP)立法,作为一种快速的支付争议解决过程,具有明确的目标,以促进建筑合同链内的现金流动。该制度在澳大利亚和新加坡实施了十多年后,很明显存在许多操作问题,危及该立法的预期目标,特别是在裁决复杂的支付纠纷方面。本文的目的是探讨行业利益相关者对法定裁判的一些操作问题的看法以及可能的解决方案。设计/方法/方法采用“专家访谈”法收集实证数据,共采访了来自澳大利亚和新加坡的23名从业人员。研究结果发现,在执行过程中存在许多问题,如授权提名机构的偏见、裁决时限短、审裁人员的规定不足、司法管辖权的挑战、法院和律师的参与,以及立法的起草工作复杂等,均不利于实现SOP立法的目标。研究亦分析业界专家对标准作业程序立法运作的意见,例如遵循经修订的昆士兰州模式,以及引入立法审查机制和建立同行审查程序。它还提出了具体的修正案,使立法更加方便。实际意义本研究的意义是更好地理解法定裁判所固有的最关键问题,这些问题需要立法机关和决策者认真考虑。此外,本研究还针对每一个发现的问题,提供了行业从业者提出的一些切实可行的措施,为SOP法律的潜在改革提供可靠的参考。对法定裁判运行中存在的问题进行实证研究的不足。该研究提供了原始的实证研究结果,这在当今SOP法律改革的动态运动中变得非常必要,特别是在澳大利亚。本研究针对所发现的问题,提供业界人士建议的可行措施,为SOP法律的改革提供可靠的参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信