Choosing the Right Person to Help Resolve a Construction Dispute

Different disputes require different expertise

Some disputes are predominantly legal in nature and substantial legal expertise may be particularly important. Others may turn on technical questions requiring specialist engineering, programming, quantity surveying or other expertise.

But many construction disputes do not fit neatly into either category.

A variation dispute, for example, may involve contractual entitlement, technical scope, valuation, program consequences and broader commercial implications. Understanding the dispute requires an appreciation of how those dimensions interact.

The appropriate expertise will therefore depend on both the nature of the dispute and the process being undertaken.

Understanding the dispute — and the project

There are highly experienced construction lawyers and other professionals who have spent their careers working on major construction and infrastructure disputes. That experience can be invaluable.

There is also a different perspective that comes from having been directly responsible for delivering projects.

Project leaders make decisions while managing budgets, programs, contractual obligations, technical requirements, risk and commercial relationships. Those who have worked across client, engineering and contractor environments may also have experienced similar issues from very different perspectives.

That experience can bring an additional dimension to dispute resolution: an appreciation not only of the parties' stated positions, but of the project and commercial realities sitting behind them.

The role of lawyers

Lawyers remain an important part of many construction dispute resolution processes, advising parties on contractual and legal positions, risk and the implications of any proposed resolution.

That role is different from, but complementary to, the role of the independent practitioner. An effective process can bring together strong legal advice, appropriate technical expertise and an independent practitioner with experience suited to the particular dispute.

Seeing the dispute from more than one perspective

Construction disputes can look very different from different parts of the project environment.

A client may be considering budget, accountability, project outcomes and the consequences of accepting a claim. A contractor may be managing the financial consequences of additional work, delay or risks it considers were not included in its original price.

Someone who has worked across those environments brings first-hand experience of the different commercial pressures and responsibilities that can sit behind the parties' positions.

Understanding those perspectives does not mean accepting one over another. It means being able to engage with the dispute in its broader project and commercial context.

That perspective can be particularly valuable where the objective is to move beyond established positions and identify a workable pathway towards resolution.

Matching the practitioner to the dispute

Legal expertise will often form an important part of the parties' advisory team throughout the dispute resolution process. The independent practitioner brings a different and complementary perspective.

For many construction and infrastructure disputes, there is considerable value in combining specialist dispute resolution capability with direct experience across client, engineering and contractor environments.

This is where infraADR can assist. Our practitioners bring that combination of dispute resolution capability and major project experience, providing an independent perspective informed by first-hand experience of the technical and commercial realities across different parts of project delivery.