Challenges of Legal Intermediaries in Construction Litigation
Publication: Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Volume 15, Issue 2
Abstract
Litigation remains the least preferred dispute resolution method because it promotes adversarial relationships between disputants. However, its ability to secure a binding decision has proven its effectiveness in ending disputes. Because construction lawyers typically are only involved after disputes arise, construction professionals who have been part of the project since the inception stage need to fill the knowledge gap of the lawyers about the projects, taking up the roles of legal intermediaries. The communication between legal intermediaries and construction lawyers is one of the determinants of the case verdict because it fundamentally affects the potential of lawyers in preparation for litigation. This paper aims to formulate litigation case management strategies for legal intermediaries. The process included the identification of potential challenges faced by legal intermediaries during preparation for litigation and was followed by suggestions to overcome them. Quantity surveyors (QSs) were selected as the subject of study because the aspects covered by them during litigation preparation are wider than other construction practitioners. Qualitative research was conducted by interviewing 13 respondents who are construction lawyers and QSs who have experience in construction litigation. Among the challenges faced by legal intermediaries in litigation case management are documentation, proceedings, knowledge of the law, personality, and their daily job scope. The findings on their strengths, weaknesses, and suggested methods to overcome the challenges were integrated to form strategies for legal intermediaries in overcoming the challenges faced in preparation for litigation. Apart from contributing to the current body of knowledge, construction professionals could equip themselves by applying the suggested methods from this study to overcome the challenges faced as legal intermediaries.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
All data generated or analyzed during the study are included in the published paper.
References
Works Cited
Alaloul, W., M. Hasaniyah, and B. Tayeh. 2019. “A comprehensive review of disputes prevention and resolution in construction projects.” In Proc., MATEC Web of Conf. Les Ulis, France: EDP Sciences.
Alshahrani, S. 2017. “Dispute resolution methods in the construction industry sector in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.” In Proc., MATEC Web of Conf. Les Ulis, France: EDP Sciences.
Arcadis. 2021. 2021 global construction disputes report. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Arcadis.
Bakhary, N. A., H. Adnan, and A. Ibrahim. 2015. “A study of construction claim management problems in Malaysia.” Proc. Econ. Finance 23 (2015): 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00327-5.
Chan, E. E., M. Nik-Bakht, and S. H. Han. 2021. “Sources of ambiguity in construction contract documents, reflected by litigation in Supreme Court cases.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 13 (4): 04521031. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000498.
Chief Registrar Federal Court of Malaysia. 2022. “Procedures in civil cases.” Accessed July 26, 2022. https://www.kehakiman.gov.my/en/procedures-civil-cases.
Chong, H. Y., and R. Mohamad Zin. 2012. “Selection of dispute resolution methods: Factor analysis approach.” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage. 19 (4): 428–443. https://doi.org/10.1108/09699981211237120.
Echternach-Jaubert, M., R. Pellerin, and L. Joblot. 2021. “Litigation management process in construction industry.” Procedia Comput. Sci. 181 (2021): 678–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.01.218.
Gerber, P., and D. Serra. 2011. “Construction litigation: Are we doing it better?” Melbourne Univ. Law Rev. 35 (3): 933–971.
Irani, E. 2019. “The use of videoconferencing for qualitative interviewing: Opportunities, challenges, and considerations.” Clin. Nurs. Res. 28 (1): 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1054773818803170.
Ismail, S. 2016. Case management for civil trials in Malaysia: Rationale and process. Selangor, Malaysia: Current Law Journal Online.
Jagannathan, M., and V. S. K. Delhi. 2019. “Litigation proneness of dispute resolution clauses in construction contracts.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 11 (3): 04519011. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000301.
Jagannathan, M., and V. S. K. Delhi. 2021. “Identifying focus areas to decode the decision to litigate contractual disputes in construction.” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage. 29 (8): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-01-2021-0014.
Lim, C. F. 2016. “Malaysia: Resolution of construction industry disputes: Arbitration, statutory adjudication, or litigation in the construction court?” Accessed July 26, 2022. https://www.mondaq.com/construction-planning/467878/resolution-of-construction-industry-disputes-arbitration-statutory-adjudication-or-litigation-in-the-construction-court.
Mbachu, J. 2015. Quantity surveyor’s role in the delivery of construction projects: A review. Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Institute of Quantity Surveyors.
Mohd-Danuri, M. S. 2021. Dispute avoidance and resolution procedure for the construction industry. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: University of Malaya Press.
Mohd Noor, S. N. A., and S. U. Mohd Tobi. 2020. “Competencies of quantity surveyors in construction industry: Document reviews from different quantity surveyor professional bodies.” Mater. Sci. Eng. 864 (012098): 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/864/1/012098.
Nelson, D. K. 2007. Construction law litigation strategies: Leading lawyers on analyzing the basis of a dispute, preparing for trial, and understanding construction laws (inside the minds). Eagan, MN: Aspatore Books.
Oke, A. E., D. R. Ogunsemi, and M. Adeyelu. 2019. “Quadrant and gap analysis of required and exhibited quantity surveyors’ competencies.” J. Eng. Des. Technol. 17 (6): 1161–1173. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-01-2019-0029.
Pelisse, J. 2019. “Varieties of legal intermediaries: When non-legal professionals act as legal intermediaries.” Stud. Law Politics Soc. 81 (1): 101–128. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1059-433720190000081005.
Ramdav, T., and N. Harinarain. 2020. “A strategic framework for the survival of the quantity surveying profession.” J. Eng. Des. Technol. 18 (6): 1487–1518. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-03-2019-0058.
Saeb, A., M. S. Mohd-Danuri, O. B. Mohamed, and N. B. Zakaria. 2021. “A mechanism for dispute resolution in the Iranian construction industry.” J. Constr. Dev. Countries 26 (1): 205–226. https://doi.org/10.21315/jcdc2021.26.1.10.
Sinha, A. K., and K. N. Jha. 2020. “Impact of judicial overreach on PPP construction projects.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 11 (4): 05019006. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000330.
Yap, J. B. H., M. Skitmore, Y. W. Lim, S.-C. Loo, and J. Gray. 2021. “Assessing the expected current and future competencies of quantity surveyors in the Malaysian built environment.” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage. 29 (6): 3. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-01-2021-0091.
Zorza, R., and D. Udell. 2014. “New roles for non-lawyers to increase access to justice.” Fordham Urban Law J. 41 (4): 1259–1315.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Volume 15 • Issue 2 • May 2023
Copyright
© 2023 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Aug 8, 2022
Accepted: Nov 17, 2022
Published online: Mar 13, 2023
Published in print: May 1, 2023
Discussion open until: Aug 13, 2023
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.