Advocating international arbitration and alternative dispute resolution

The construction industry, especially on the international level has always had a special need for mechanisms to resolve construction project disputes quickly, at best promptly on the site. At present, there are existing promising devices under Anglo-Saxon law providing for a “real time” dispute resolution on the site: the Dispute Review Board (DRB) and the Adjudication process which are slowly replacing the traditional Engineer to resolve the matter in dispute. Experience with DRBs and DABs (Dispute Adjudication Boards) on large international projects to date indicates that the informal, advisory role of such alternative mechanisms is of increasing importance. By seeking an opinion from them, the parties can determine in advance what their rights are without the risk of facing an adverse binding decision. However, once alternative dispute resolution does not lead to satisfying solution, the matter should be referred to international arbitration under well established Rules of Arbitration, e.g. the ICC in Paris or the UNCITRAL Rules. As a final resort, in case that also arbitration is incriminated with problems, then the contractor might consider to lodge his case with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (>> ICSID) which was established in October 1966 under the auspices of the World Bank. According to recent case law, an ICSID tribunal considered that a highway construction contract may constitute under certain conditions an "investment" both under the bilateral investment treaty and under the ICSID Convention.