This article compares and contrasts mandatory statutory construction adjudication with voluntary systems for resolving construction disputes, principally Dispute Boards (DBs) and (in Hong Kong) the Dispute Resolution Adviser (DRA/DRAd), and discusses how these systems may co-exist. The author suggests the use by parties of DBs or DRA/DRAds for disputes generally, in order to maximise party autonomy, with statutory adjudication being retained as a fallback for payment disputes.
Asian Dispute Review