Binding Power of Dispute Board Judgment in Construction Dispute Settlement

Yuridika Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.20473/ydk.v38i1.42717
Lintang Yudhantaka, Y. S. Simamora, Ghansham Anand
{"title":"Binding Power of Dispute Board Judgment in Construction Dispute Settlement","authors":"Lintang Yudhantaka, Y. S. Simamora, Ghansham Anand","doi":"10.20473/ydk.v38i1.42717","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Construction work in its implementation is carried out based on a contract. If there are problems in carrying out construction work, a dispute between the parties, in this case the service user and the service provider, will occur. Indonesia Law No. 2/2017 about Construction Services (hereafter called UU 2/2017) provides a new dispute resolution model option if problems occur in the construction sector, namely through the Dispute Board. The Dispute Board was created by the International Federation of Consulting Engineers / Federation Internationale des Ingenieurs-Conseils or FIDIC which was adopted into UU 2/2017. However, the regulation regarding the Dispute Board in UU 2/2017 needs to be studied further, especially regarding the nature of the final binding decision, because it still raises problems in its implementation. The purpose of this study is to examine the development of dispute resolution in the field of construction and the implementation of the final and binding nature of dispute board decisions. This study employed legal research methods with a conceptual and statute approach. The results of this study found that construction disputes can be resolved through litigation or non-litigation. The presence of the Dispute Board still does not provide legal certainty for the parties because the nature of the decision is final and binding but is not supported by an implementation mechanism.","PeriodicalId":31372,"journal":{"name":"Yuridika","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Yuridika","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20473/ydk.v38i1.42717","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

Construction work in its implementation is carried out based on a contract. If there are problems in carrying out construction work, a dispute between the parties, in this case the service user and the service provider, will occur. Indonesia Law No. 2/2017 about Construction Services (hereafter called UU 2/2017) provides a new dispute resolution model option if problems occur in the construction sector, namely through the Dispute Board. The Dispute Board was created by the International Federation of Consulting Engineers / Federation Internationale des Ingenieurs-Conseils or FIDIC which was adopted into UU 2/2017. However, the regulation regarding the Dispute Board in UU 2/2017 needs to be studied further, especially regarding the nature of the final binding decision, because it still raises problems in its implementation. The purpose of this study is to examine the development of dispute resolution in the field of construction and the implementation of the final and binding nature of dispute board decisions. This study employed legal research methods with a conceptual and statute approach. The results of this study found that construction disputes can be resolved through litigation or non-litigation. The presence of the Dispute Board still does not provide legal certainty for the parties because the nature of the decision is final and binding but is not supported by an implementation mechanism.
争议委员会判决在工程争议解决中的约束力
建筑工程的实施是根据合同进行的。如果在施工过程中出现问题,就会发生双方之间的纠纷,在这种情况下是服务用户和服务提供者之间的纠纷。印度尼西亚关于建筑服务的第2/2017号法律(以下称为UU 2/2017)提供了一个新的争议解决模式选择,如果建筑部门发生问题,即通过争议委员会。争议委员会由国际咨询工程师联合会/国际工程师联合会(FIDIC)创建,并在UU 2/2017中被采纳。然而,UU 2/2017中关于争议委员会的规定需要进一步研究,特别是关于最终具有约束力的决定的性质,因为它在实施中仍然存在问题。本研究的目的是研究建筑领域争议解决的发展,以及争议委员会裁决的最终和约束性的执行情况。本研究采用概念法和成文法相结合的法律研究方法。本研究结果发现,建筑纠纷可以通过诉讼或非诉讼的方式解决。争端委员会的存在仍然不能为当事方提供法律确定性,因为裁决的性质是最终的和有约束力的,但没有执行机制的支持。
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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