Lal, H (2009) Disputes under the UK's 'new' Construction Act. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 162(4), pp. 151-155. ISSN 17514312
Abstract
The UK's 'Construction Act' is now well into the formal process of change. The Bill completed its House of Lords stages on 29 April 2009 and was presented in the House of Commons on 30 April and debated at second reading on 1 June 2009. The bill was sent to a public bill committee that completed its consideration on 18 June 2009. Fundamental change will be visited upon the construction industry. The irresistible question is whether the bill's proposed amendments are sufficiently thorough or whether they still leave scope for creative legal arguments and/or disputes. This paper seeks to answer these questions. The proposed changes are explained together with a review of those issues where change is not (currently) contemplated and/or where disputes are likely.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contracts and law; government |
| Index terms: | commons, construction industry, dispute |
| Subjects: | property law, dispute resolution, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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