Construction Dispute Resolution in Ireland during Recession: Best Practice for Small-to-Medium Enterprises

The purpose of this paper is to identify best practice construction dispute resolution in small-to-medium enterprises (SMEs) within Ireland during the recent economic recession. A sequential mixed methodology encompassing a detailed literature review, case studies, and questionnaire survey is adopted, with results analyzed using both exploratory (data reduction) and confirmatory (structural equation modelling) factor analysis. The results show that four core aspects should be adopted by SMEs to achieve best practice construction dispute resolution in recession: third-party intervention, adoption of a streamlined process, proactive party characteristics, and the use of legal professionals. Numerous studies of this subject have been conducted; however, no research has been done to date documenting best practice in construction dispute resolution within SMEs, particularly in light of the economic recession in Ireland. It is clear that dispute resolution in Ireland is currently undergoing fundamental changes, and time is necessary to see if the new Construction Contracts Act 2013 will help this practice. Therefore, it is a fundamental requirement for project management and legal professionals to acknowledge the changing environment attributable to the economic downturn and the resultant SME best practices in dispute resolution. This paper fulfills a gap in knowledge with the emergence of the economic recession and the evolution of best practice in dispute resolution within SMEs in the Irish construction sector.

NEC Contracting: Evaluation of the Inclusion of Dispute Review Boards in lieu of Adjudication in the Construction Industry in the United Kinddom

The construction industry is renowned for spending vast sums in the resolution of disputes, but never in the prevention. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the New Engineering Contract (NEC) to determine whether or not adjudication has become misaligned with the contract’s objective of promoting effective management. In doing so, the paper examines dispute review boards in order to ascertain if they could be a viable alternative to adjudication. A sequential mixed methodology is adopted including a detailed literature review, eight semi-structured interviews, culminating in the circulation and analysis of a questionnaire, to record the significance of the factors identified. The research concludes that the majority of individuals agree that dispute review boards would be more aligned with the NEC. The familiarity of members, the potential to curb rogue behaviour of parties and the proactive nature of the board are flagged as positive features, however the cost aspect requires further investigation. The reservations made in the study about adjudication, such as the priority given to speed over accuracy and also the adversarial nature of the process, suggest that a preventative step prior to proceeding to adjudication would coincide more with the three core themes of the NEC Contract and therefore, be a positive addition.

Firms and Innovative Conflict Management Systems in Ireland

This article examines the practices adopted by firms in the Republic of Ireland to manage conflict involving groups of employees, focusing in particular on the uptake of 'alternative dispute resolution practices'. The article reveals that conflict management practices take the form of 'systems', and it estimates the incidence of innovative conflict management systems, incorporating alternative dispute resolution (ADR) practices, as involving about 30 per cent of firms. A series of influences are shown to be associated with innovative, ADR-based conflict management systems, especially commitment-oriented HRM practices and whether unions are recognized. © Blackwell Publishing Ltd/London School of Economics 2010.

Mediation within Irish Construction Industry: Identifying Success Factors for Appropriate Competencies and Processes

The construction industry notoriously excels at dispute creation both in Ireland and abroad. This paper examines mediation in the Irish construction industry as a means of conflict and dispute resolution. It aims to identify success factors for appropriate competencies and processes required by mediators and other parties operating in the construction industry. Methodology includes a thorough review of the literature, followed by detailed interviews from industry experts to elicit and highlight the core competencies required. To aid in the analysis, qualitative analysis using mind mapping software was used. The findings suggest that facilitative mediation was best suited for the Irish construction industry. 13 and 17 success factors were identified as key skills necessary for a mediator and for a successful mediation process. For the skills, it ranges across behavioural, technical and intellectual skills. The mediation process factors can be split into actions of the mediator and other parties in the dispute. The results are similar to those identified in other countries and provide a good reference point for the development of the global construction industry. By following the findings of this report mediators and parties in dispute can improve processes and be more successful in mediation outcomes as a means of resolving conflicts and dispute.

A Review of Meditation in the Irish Construction Industry: Critical Success Factors in Competencies and Processes

The construction industry notoriously excels at dispute creation – both in Ireland and world wide. This paper exams mediation in the Irish construction industry based around critical success factors in the competencies and processes required by mediators operating in the construction industry. Through conducting the relevant analysis, it was possible to extract and outline the resulting critical success factors in process and competencies of mediators in the Irish construction industry. This was achieved through a review of the literature, followed by detailed interviews from industry experts to elicit and highlight the core competencies required. To aid in the study, qualitative analysis using mind mapping software was adopted, thus assisting the identification of the key factors. Following analysis, facilitative mediation was identified as best suited for the industry in question; recommendations and experience were key for mediator selection and five and six factors were identified for mediator skills and mediation critical success factors respectively. The results returned are similar to those determined by authors in other countries and provide a good reference point for the development the industry. By following the findings of this report mediators and parties in dispute can improve processes and be more successful in outcomes. In this study the author shows that mediation is an effective and appropriate method of resolving disputes within the Irish construction industry.

The Oxford Handbook of Conflict Management in Organizations

New ways of managing conflict are increasingly important features of work and employment in organizations. In the book the world's leading scholars in the field examine a range of innovative alternative dispute resolution (ADR) practices, drawing on international research and scholarship and covering both case studies of major exemplars and developments in countries in different parts of the global economy. Developments in the management of individual and collective conflict at work are addressed, as are innovations in both unionized and non-union organizations and in the private and public sectors.

New practices for managing conflict in organizations are set in the context of trends in workplace conflict and perspectives on how conflict should be understood and addressed. Part 1 examines the changing context of conflict management by addressing the main frameworks for understanding conflict management, the trend in conflict at work, developments in employment rights, and the influence of HRM on conflict management. Part 2 covers the main approaches to conflict management in organizations, addressing both conventional and alternative approaches to conflict resolution. Conventional grievance handling and third-party processes in conflict resolution are examined as well as the main ADR practices, including conflict management in non-union firms, the role of the organizational ombudsman, mediation, interest-based bargaining, line and supervisory management, and the concept of conflict management systems. Part 3 presents case studies of exemplars and innovators in the field, covering mediation in the US postal service, interest-based bargaining at Kaiser-Permanente, 'med-arb' in the New Zealand Police, and judicial mediation in UK employment tribunals. Part 4 covers international developments in conflict management in Germany, Japan, The United States, Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and China.

This Handbook gives a comprehensive overview of this growing field, which has seen an huge increase in programmes of study in university business and law schools and in executive education programmes.

Recent Developments in the Law of Torts in Northern Ireland Annual Conference of the Irish Association of Law Teachers

This paper reviews decisions from the Northern Ireland and England and Wales High Courts and Courts of Appeal as well as the UK Supreme Court relating to tort and principally to the tort of negligence in the past 12 months or so.

In structure, the paper will be presented in four parts. First, three preliminary points relating to contemporary features of the NI civil courts: personal litigants – Devine v McAteer [2012] NICA 30 (7 September 2012); pre-action protocols – Monaghan v Graham [2013] NIQB 53 (3 May 2013); and the rise of alternative dispute resolution. On the last named issue, the recent decision of PGF II SA v OMFS Company 1 Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 1288 (23 October 2013) on unreasonable refusal to mediate, will be discussed.

Second, the paper moves to consider the law of negligence generally and case law from the NI High Court reiterating Lord Hoffmann’s view in Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council [2004] 1 AC 46 that no duty of care arises from obvious risks of injury. In this, reference will be made to the application of the above “Hoffmann principle” in West Sussex County Council v Pierce [2013] EWCA Civ 1230 (16 October 2013), which concerned an accident sustained by a child at school. A similar set of facts was presented recently to the UK Supreme Court in Woodland v Essex County Council [2013] UKSC 66 (23 October 2013). The decision there, on non-delegable duties of care, will have a significant impact for schools in the provision of extracurricular activities.

Third, I will review a NI case of note on the duty of care of solicitors in the context of professional negligence in the context of conflicting advice by counsel.

Fourth, I will examine a series of cases on employer liability and including issues such as the duty of care towards the volunteer worker; tort and safety at work principles generally; and, more specifically, the duty of care of the employer towards an employee who suffers psychiatric illness as a result of stress and/or harassment at work. On the issue of workplace stress, the NI courts have made extensive reference to the Hale LJ principles found in the Court of Appeal decision of Hatton v Sutherland [2002] 1 All ER 1 and applied to those who have suffered trauma in reporting on or policing “the troubles” in Northern Ireland. On the issue of statutory harassment at work, the paper will also mention the UK Supreme Court’s decision in Hayes v Willoughby [2013] UKSC 17 (20 March 2013).

Sporting Justice: An Arbitrator's Perspective

Drawing on my experience of a number of sports dispute resolution tribunals in the UK and Ireland (such as Sports Resolutions UK; Just Sport Ireland; the Football Association of Ireland’s Disciplinary Panel and the Gaelic Athletic Association’s Dispute Resolution Authority) I intend to use this paper to review the legal arguments typically made in sports-related arbitrations. These points of interest can be summarised as a series of three questions: the fairness question; the liability question; the penalty question.

In answer to the fairness question, the aim is to give a brief outline on best practice in establishing a "fair" sports disciplinary tribunal. The answer, I believe, is always twofold in nature: first, and to paraphrase Lord Steyn in R v Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Daly [2001] UKHL 26 at [28] "in law, context is everything" – translated into the present matter, this means that in sports disciplinary cases, the more serious the charges against the individual (in terms of reputational damage, economic impact and/or length of sanction); the more tightly wrapped the procedural safeguards surrounding any subsequent disciplinary hearing must be. A fair disciplinary system will be discussed in the context of the principles laid down in Article 8 of the World Anti-Doping Code which, in effect, acts as sport’s Article 6 of the ECHR on a right to a fair trial.

Following on from the above, in the 60 or so sports arbitrations that I have heard, there are two further points of interest. First, the claim before the arbitral panel will often be framed in an argument that, for various reasons of substantive and procedural irregularity, the sanction imposed on the appellant should be quashed ("the liability"). Second, and in alternative, that the sanction imposed was wholly disproportionate ("the penalty").

The liability issue usually breaks down into two further questions. First, what is the nature of the legal duty upon a sports body in exercising its disciplinary remit? Second, to what extent does a de novo hearing on appeal cure any apparent defects in a hearing of first instance? The first issue often results in an arbitral panel debating the contra preferentum approach to the interpretation of a contested rule i.e., the sports body’s rules in question are so ambiguous that they should be interpreted in a manner to the detriment of the rule maker and in favour of the appellant. On the second matter, it now appears to be a general principle of sports law, administrative law and even human rights law that even if a violation of the principles of natural justice takes place at the first instance stage of a disciplinary process, they may be cured on de novo appeal. Authority for this approach can be found at the Court of Arbitration for Sport and in particular in CAS 2009/A/1920 FK Pobeda, Aleksandar Zabrcanec, Nikolce Zdraveski v UEFA at para 87.

The question on proportionality asks what, aside from precedent found within the decisions of the sports body in question, are the general legal principles against which a sanction by a sports disciplinary body can be benchmarked in order to ascertain whether it is disproportionate in length or even irrational in nature?

On the matter of (dis)proportionality of sanction, the debate is usually guided by the authority in Bradley v the Jockey Club [2004] EWHC 2164 (QB) and affirmed at [2005] EWCA Civ 1056. The Bradley principles on proportionality of sports-specific sanctions, recently cited with approval at the Court of Arbitration for Sport, will be examined in this presentation.

Finally, an interesting application of many of the above principles (and others such as the appropriate standard of proof in sports disciplinary procedures) can be made to recent match-fixing or corruption related hearings held by the British Horse Racing Authority, the integrity units of snooker and tennis, and at the Court of Arbitration for Sport.