Comparison of Mediation Systems in the Construction Industry of Two European Countries
Publication: Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Volume 13, Issue 4
Abstract
The construction process is multistage and usually involves different stakeholders. The stakeholders of this process pursue different goals and implement them by different means, which would predetermine various disputable situations. In case of resolving disputes in the court, it is necessary to prepare and provide a large number of documents and evidence. Those need to be prepared separately for each defendant depending on the type of dispute. Resolving construction disputes by such judicial way takes a substantial period of time and incurs substantial expenses. Large amounts of company resources and time are invested to dispute-resolving processes that can be used in a business. Among the various dispute resolution methods, mediation has been increasingly gaining recognition and acceptance in construction. Unfortunately, in new European countries like Lithuania, the implementation of mediation is still in the initial stage. This study encompasses the nature of construction disputes, key features of mediation, analysis of main differences among court and mediation processes, and pros and cons of mediation with special reference to the construction industry in Germany and Lithuania. Based on these results, recommendations to increase mediation in Countries that are new to the EU countries are elaborated. Finally, it is concluded that more education of construction professionals about mediation, more training of competent construction mediation, and incorporation of mediation clauses in construction contracts are strongly advocated.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
All data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
List of Statutes
Ciro Di Donna v. Società imballaggi metallici Salerno srl (SIMSA), [Case C-492/11, Request for a preliminary ruling from the Giudice di pace di Mercato San Severino, Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber), June 27, 2013].
Dėl taikinamojo tarpininkavimo (mediacijos) plėtros ir taikaus ginčų sprendimo skatinimo plano patvirtinimo [Concerning the development of conciliation and the approval of a plan to promote the peaceful settlement of disputes], Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Lithuania, 2010, Valstybės žinios, 2010, No. 139-7162 (in Lithuanian).
Directive 2008/52/EC of 21 May 2008 on Certain Aspects of Mediation in Civil and Commercial Matters, European Parliament and the Council, 2008, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/GA/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008L0052 (Accessed November 9, 2019).
European Code of Conduct for Mediators, 2004, https://www.euromed-justice.eu/en/document/eu-european-code-conduct-mediators (Accessed November 5, 2019).
Lietuvos Respublikos administracinių bylų teisenos įstatymo Nr. VIII-1029 pakeitimo ir papildymo nutarimas [Law on Administrative Proceedings of the Republic of Lithuania No. VIII-1029 Amendment Act], 2018, TAR, 2018-12-05, No. 19765 (in Lithuanian).
Lietuvos Respublikos civilinių ginčų taikinamojo tarpininkavimo įstatymo Nr. X-1702 pakeitimo įstatymas [Law on Conciliatory Mediation in Civil Disputes of the Republic of Lithuania No. X-1702 Amendment Act], 2017, TAR, 2017-07-12, No. 12053 (in Lithuanian).
Lietuvos Respublikos komercinio arbitražo įstatymas [Law on Commercial Arbitration of the Republic of Lithuania], Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania, 1996, Valstybės žinios, 1996-05-02, No. 39-961 (In Lithuanian).
Lietuvos Respublikos mediacijos įstatymas [Law on Conciliatory Mediation in Civil Disputes of the Republic of Lithuania], Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania, 2008, Valstybės žinios, 2008-07-31, No. 87-3462 (in Lithuanian).
Lietuvos Respublikos teismų įstatymas [Law on Courts of the Republic of Lithuania], Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania, 1994, Valstybės žinios, 1994-06-17, No. 46-851 (in Lithuanian).
Mediationsgesetz [Mediation Act] of 21 July 2012 (Federal Law Gazette I, p. 1577), as last amended by Article 135 of the Statutory Instrument of 31 August 2015 (Federal Law Gazette I, p. 1474), Parliament of the Republic of Germany, 2015, https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_mediationsg/englisch_mediationsg.pdf (Accessed November 8, 2019) (in German).
Teisminės mediacijos taisyklės [Judicial Mediation Rules], Council of Courts, 2018, TAR, 2018-12-04, No. 19675 (in Lithuanian).
Verordnung über die Aus- und Fortbildung von zertifizierten Mediatoren (Zertifizierte-Mediatoren-Ausbildungsverordnung—ZMediatAusbV) of Aug. 21, 2016, Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection of Germany, 2016, https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/zmediatausbv/index.html#BJNR199400016BJNE000100000 (Accessed November 26, 2019) (in German).
Zivilprozessordnung [Code of Civil Procedure] of 05 December 2005 (Federal Law Gazette I, 3202), as last amended by Article 10 of the Statutory Instrument of 20 November 2019 (Federal Law Gazette I, p. 1724), Parliament of the Republic of Germany, 2019, https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_zpo/englisch_zpo.html#p0021 (Accessed November 28, 2019).
Works Cited
Cakmak, E., and P. I. Cakmak. 2014. “An analysis of causes of disputes in the construction industry using analytical network process.” Procedia Social Behav. Sci. 109 (Jan): 183–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.441.
Charehzehi, A., C. Chai, A. Md Yusof, H.-Y. Chong, and S. C. Loo. 2017. “Building information modeling in construction conflict management.” Int. J. Eng. Bus. Manage. 9 (2): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/1847979017746257.
Chau, K. W. 2007. “Application of a PSO-based neural network in analysis of outcomes of construction claims.” Autom. Constr. 16 (5): 642–646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2006.11.008.
Chee, S. W. H. 2013. “From right to interest—Specialised facilitative mediation (construction).” J.S.D. thesis, School of Law, City Univ. of Hong Kong.
Cheng, M. Y., H. C. Tsai, and Y. H. Chiu. 2009. “Fuzzy case-based reasoning for coping with construction disputes.” Expert Syst. Appl. 36 (2): 4106–4113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.03.025.
Cheng, T. Y. W., and G. K. L. Soo. 2013. Construction law and practice in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Sweet and Maxwell.
Cheung, S. O., and K. T. W. Yiu. 2007. “A study of construction mediator tactics—Part I: Taxonomies of dispute sources, mediator tactics and mediation outcomes.” Build. Environ. 42 (2): 752–761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.09.004.
El-Sayegh, S., I. Ahmad, M. Aljanabi, R. Herzallah, S. Metry, and O. El-Ashwal. 2020. “Construction disputes in the UAE: Causes and resolution methods.” Buildings 10 (10): 171. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings10100171.
Elziny, A. A., M. A. Mohamadien, H. M. Ibrahim, and M. K. Abdel Fattah. 2016. “An expert system to manage dispute resolutions in construction projects in Egypt.” Ain Shams Eng. J. 7 (1): 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2015.05.002.
Fisher, R., W. Ury, and B. Patton. 2011. Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. New York: Penguin.
Kaklauskas, A., V. Kersuliene, and V. Urbanaviciene. 2008. “Determination of rational method for resolution of disputes with the help of multi-criteria negotiation decision support system for real estate.” In Proc., 25th Int. Symp. on Automatic and Robotics in Construction, 585–591. Mount Waverley, VIC: Technika.
Kaminskienė, N. 2010. “Court mediation in Lithuania: Quo vadis?” Socialinis darbas 9 (1): 54–63.
Kaminskienė, N. 2013. “Mandatory mediation: Opportunities and challenges.” Jurisprudence 20 (2): 683–705. https://doi.org/10.13165/JUR-13-20-2-17.
Kumaraswamy, M. M. 1998. “Consequences of construction conflict: A Hong Kong perspective.” J. Manage. Eng. 14 (3): 66–74. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(1998)14:3(66).
Lee, C. K., T. W. Yiu, and S. O. Cheung. 2016. “Selection and use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in construction projects—Past and future research.” Int. J. Project Manage. 34 (3): 494–507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.12.008.
Li, K., and S. O. Cheung. 2020. “Alleviating bias to enhance sustainable construction dispute management.” J. Cleaner Prod. 249 (Mar): 119311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119311.
LITEKO (Lithuanian Courts Information System/Database). 2020. “Lietuvos teismų informacinė sistema.” [In Lithuanian.] Accessed January 6, 2020. http://liteko.teismai.lt/viesasprendimupaieska/.
Lithuanian Courts. 2018. “Activity report of the judicial mediation commission for 2017.” [In Lithuanian.] Accessed January 6, 2020. https://www.teismai.lt/data/public/uploads/2018/04/2018-03-30-2017-m-tmk-veiklos-ataskaita.pdf.
Lithuanian Courts. 2020. “The media and the public: Publications in the media.” [In Lithuanian.] Accessed January 6, 2020. https://www.teismai.lt/lt/visuomenei-ir-ziniasklaidai/teismine-mediacija/publikacijos-ziniasklaidoje/3579.
Liu, J., H. Li, M. Skitmore, and Y. Zhang. 2019. “Experience mining based on case-based reasoning for dispute settlement of international construction projects.” Autom. Constr. 97 (Jan): 181–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.11.006.
Maemura, Y., E. Kim, and K. Ozawa. 2018. “Root causes of recurring contractual conflicts in international construction projects: Five case studies from Vietnam.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 144 (8): 05018008. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001523.
Mahamid, I. 2016. “Micro and macro level of dispute causes in residential building projects: Studies of Saudi Arabia.” J. King Saud Univ. Eng. Sci. 28 (1): 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksues.2014.03.002.
Masser, K., B. Engewald, L. Scharpf, and J. Ziekow. 2017. “Evaluierung des Mediationsgesetzes–Rechtstatsächliche Untersuchung im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz.” [In German.] Accessed November 23, 2019. https://www.bmjv.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Service/StudienUntersuchungenFachbuecher/Evaluationsbericht_Mediationsgesetz.pdf?__blob=publicationFileandv=1.
Oghigian, H. 2003. “The mediation/arbitration hybrid.” J. Int. Arbitration 20 (1): 75–80.
Quapp, U., and K. Holschemacher. 2020a. “Comparison of alternative construction dispute resolution measures.” In Vol. 7 of Proc., Int. Structural Engineering and Construction: Emerging Technologies and Sustainability Principles in Structural Engineering and Construction, edited by H. Askarinejad, S. Yazdani, and A. Singh. Fargo, North Dakota: ISEC Press.
Quapp, U., and K. Holschemacher. 2020b. “Noncompliance of fixed tariffs for architectural and engineering services with European law.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 12 (4): 05020013. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000426.
Richbell, D. 2008. Mediation of construction disputes. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Simaitis, R. 2007. “Development of mediation in Lithuania.” In The recent tendencies of development in civil procedure law—Between East and West. Vilnius, Lithuania: Justitia.
Stubbe, C. 2009. “Konfliktmanagement—Bedarfsgerechte Streitbeilegungsinstrumente.” SchiedsVZ–Zeitschrift für das Schiedsverfahren 2009 (6): 321–326.
Viswanathan, S. K., A. Panwar, S. Kar, R. Lavingiya, and K. N. Jha. 2020. “Causal modeling of disputes in construction projects.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 12 (4): 04520035. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000432.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Volume 13 • Issue 4 • November 2021
Copyright
© 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Feb 3, 2021
Accepted: May 7, 2021
Published online: Aug 5, 2021
Published in print: Nov 1, 2021
Discussion open until: Jan 5, 2022
ASCE Technical Topics:
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.