Coggins, J; Elliott, R F and Bell, M (2010) Towards harmonisation of construction industry payment legislation: A consideration of the success afforded by the East and West coast models in Australia. Construction Economics and Building, 10(3), pp. 14-35. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
This article considers the success of the two distinct construction industry payment legislative models operating in Australia - East Coast and West Coast - in achieving their objective of improving cash flow throughout the construction industry. Success parameters are identified by the authors; namely: the levels of justice afforded by the legislation, the administrative and legal burden generated by the legislation, and the impact of the legislation on the relationships between the contracting parties - which are used as a basis to discuss and compare the performances of the East and West Coast models. It is concluded that the West Coast model provides a more just dispute resolution process, generates less administrative and legal burden, and is more conducive towards establishing positive relationships between contracting parties. However, it is recognised that there is a need for more data to be gathered from construction industry stakeholders before any firm recommendations can start to be made as to the most appropriate conceptual framework and detail for a harmonised approach.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | payment legislation; contract administration |
| Index terms: | construction industry, dispute, resolution, conceptual framework, Australia, contracting party, justice, contract administration, cash flow, legislation, payment legislation |
| Subjects: | Geography, contract management, practitioner, dispute resolution, financial management, theoretical framing, industry analysis, legal systems, conflict resolution |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Legal Issues, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Cost Management, Research Practice, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here