The contractual relationship of the parties to a construction contract is extensive, complex, and specific, which impacts the legal sources of the construction contract and the manner of resolving the resulting disputes. Party autonomy plays an important role in both, allowing them to regulate the content of their relationship by referring to autonomous rules, such as the FIDIC General Conditions. The most important features of a construction contract are simultaneously the root causes of construction disputes. The latter require rapid resolution, which necessitates the need for an efficient and flexible procedure that can address disagreements as promptly as possible. Due to the slow and rigid procedure, litigation does not seem to be an appropriate choice, which is why business practice is increasingly using alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods. FIDIC also completes its rules with a specific dispute resolution system. The Master's Thesis presents and discusses the main features of this system. For easier understanding, some attention is initially paid to the construction contract and construction disputes.
The system of resolving disputes in terms of FIDIC General Conditions is imbued with the common law legal tradition, which can be problematic in our legal system. At the same time, it is based on a specific ADR method called dispute adjudication. Consequently, an apparent conflict with the constitutional and conventional right to to a fair trial may arise. The Master's Thesis thus addresses the compliance of the FIDIC system with our legal order and its relevance and applicability in our legal environment. It seeks to demonstrate that the said system is a welcome acquisition which, at the same time (with the exception of the clause 20.1) is consistent with our legal order.
|
