projectadr

Chair of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators

leo@onlinepartners.online (Leo Fraser) — Thu, 12 Jun 2025 08:10:56 GMT

New Appointement

In December 2021 our very own Billy Morrissey was appointed the Chair of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.

This appointment is a testament to the decades of work and experience Billy has in the sector.

Click here to read the full article

Panel of Adjudicators – Chartered Institute of Arbitrators

Tue, 10 Jun 2025 10:45:14 GMT

Panel of Adjudicators – Chartered Institute of Arbitrators

The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators Irish Branch (CIArb) is the professional home of dispute resolvers in Ireland. As an international not for profit organisation, our mission is to promote the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) as the preferred means of resolving disputes throughout the world.

Impartial – Confidential – Professional

Construction Adjudication

Construction Adjudication is a formal, private and binding process where Construction Disputes relating to Payment are resolved by a decision made of an Adjudicator. The process of adjudication is a faster, simpler and less expensive alternative to litigation.

Construction Adjudication in Ireland is governed by the Construction Contracts Act 2013 and is available as a right where disputes arise on Construction Projects. The Adjudicator to be used may be agreed by the parties, appointed by an independent body such as the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (Irish Branch) or failing that one will be appointed from the Ministers Panel.

Construction Adjudicators

Anyone can become a Construction Adjudicator. Adjudicators generally have a Legal, Quantity Surveying, Engineering or Architectural, background.

The adjudicator performs a judicial role in listening to the facts and evidence presented by the parties, applying the relevant law and issuing a decision. Parties will often seek someone who has the core skills required of an adjudicator and experience in the construction industry, thereby understanding its complexities. Everyone on the CIArb Irish Branch list of Adjudicators is a Fellow of the Institute with many year experience of resolving Construction Disputes and has also completed a CIArb approved Adjudication Training Course.

A solid grounding in adjudication training is essential for anyone wishing to practise as a Construction Industry Adjudicator, or indeed as a party representative in construction Disputes. CIArb’s Adjudication training sets the highest industry standard.

How do I become a Construction Adjudicator

The first step to becoming a Construction Adjudicator is to undertake a training course. The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators has a Pathways Programme in Construction Adjudication which covers the law of obligations, the law of adjudication, adjudication practice and procedure and decision writing. Fast track assessment programmes are available for legal professionals with experience in Adjudication. Further information on CIArb’s courses is available at:

www.ciarb.org/training

This is paragraph text. Click it or hit the Manage Text button to change the font, color, size, format, and more. To set up site-wide paragraph and title styles, go to Site Theme.

Extract from Code of Professional & Ethical Conduct for Members when acting as Neutrals;

A member shall not behave in a manner which might reasonably be perceived as conduct unbecoming a member of the Institute.

A member shall maintain the integrity and fairness of the dispute resolution process and shall withdraw if this is no longer possible.

Both before and throughout the dispute resolution process, a member shall disclose all interests, relationships and matters likely to affect the member’s independence or impartiality or which might reasonably be perceived as likely to do so.

A member shall accept an appointment or act only if appropriately qualified or experienced.

Where appropriate and having regard to whether the parties are represented by professionals familiar with the dispute resolution process, the member shall ensure that the parties are informed of the procedural aspects of the process.

A member shall communicate with those involved in the dispute resolution process only in the manner appropriate to the process.

A member shall prepare appropriately for the dispute resolution process concerned. A member shall not be influenced by outside pressure or self interest. A member shall not delegate any duty to decide to any other person unless permitted to do so by the parties or applicable law. A member shall not unduly delay the completion of the dispute resolution process.

A member shall abide by the relationship of trust which exists between those involved in the dispute and (unless otherwise agreed by all the parties, or permitted or required by applicable law), both during and after completion of the dispute resolution process, shall not disclose or use any confidential information acquired in the course of or for the purposes of the process.

A member shall charge only reasonable fees and expenses having regard to all the circumstances and shall disclose beforehand and explain to the parties to the dispute resolution process the basis upon which the fees and expenses shall be calculated and charged.

Branch Panel

Do you need an Adjudicator or advice on Adjudication?

The list of names forming our Panel is available to view on our dedicated website which is www.adjudicationpanel.ie along with a short Career Summary. These Adjudicators are all Fellows of the CIArb, have Construction Dispute Resolution Experience and have all completed a CIArb Accredited Adjudication Course including an Irish Law Module.

The Panel is prepared by the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, Irish Branch. The Branch is satis-fied that those on the list have the necessary qualifications to act as Adjudicators. The Branch cannot accept any responsibility for the manner in which the Adjudication is conducted.

Your attention is also drawn to the Code of Practise Governing the Conduct of Adjudication which is available online from the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation.

Contact

Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
The Distillery Building , 145 – 151 Church Street, Dublin 7

Phone: 01 8175307
Email: ciarb@arbitration.ie

Download Brochure

Prevention is always better than cure – Dispute Avoidance

Tue, 10 Jun 2025 10:32:33 GMT

CIArb Project Mediation & Dispute Avoidance (PMDA)

Special Interest Group

Differences will always occur on construction projects as well as projects in other sectors and parties require a dispute solving device. Project mediation and adjudication in some instances are now moving further up the construction process to the currency of the project, principally in the form of Dispute Boards, ‘a progressive dispute avoidance and resolution process’; this is a developing area for dispute avoidance and early resolution on medium to large projects. Good relationships are key to resolving problems as they arise on projects and investment in this area has proved to be a very wise one. Fundamentally, the different versions of progressive project mediation and dispute boards are the same, each providing early resolution based on the contractual bargain between the parties.

Dispute boards can provide an early and economical resolution of disputes on construction and infrastructure projects allowing the work to proceed without delay or increased costs. A dispute board is a creature of contract depending on the jurisdiction agreed by the parties; it can vary from a dispute review board to a dispute adjudication board. Subject to contractual arrangements it is normal for the opportunity to remain for project disputes to be referred to adjudication, arbitration or the courts if the dispute board’s recommendation or decision is not accepted by the parties.

The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb) is well up to speed with this emerging trend in project mediation / dispute boards and like other institutions after consultation it has published Rules for this ADR process in 2014 including relevant tripartite agreements. Aside from the obvious benefits of dispute avoidance on projects this area could provide opportunities for experienced CIArb members with professional backgrounds in the construction sector in particular combined with their accredited and flexible ADR skill set. This new Special Interest Group (SIG) on Project Mediation & Dispute Avoidance is supported by the CIArb – Irish Branch Committee and is chaired by Branch Committee Member, William Morrissey FCIArb. It will engage with the sector, review the position and best practice and assess opportunities and requirements in this area of ADR for the Members and report to the Branch Committee.

Enquiries:

CIArb -PMDA – SIG:

Bill Morrissey (T: 01- 6401969); (e-mail: billy@projectadr.com ) or ciarb@arbitration.ie

Project Dispute Avoidance and Resolution Event

Tue, 10 Jun 2025 10:21:15 GMT

Project Dispute Avoidance and Resolution Event

About the event

Project risk management including the avoidance and early resolution of disputes is critical in a more formalised construction sector. This applies to all contracts, written or verbal, public or private, large or small, professional advice / design or construction, infrastructure or homes, M&E contracts or pharmaceutical facilities and even works down on the farm.

Both promoters and contractors must now place a greater emphasis on risk management and in 2016 the Government has introduced statutory adjudication under the Construction Contracts Act 2013 as well as updating the Public Works suite of contract documents with introductory dispute avoidance terms.

About The Speakers

This is paragraph text. Click it or hit the Manage Text button to change the font, color, size, format, and more. To set up site-wide paragraph and title styles, go to Site Theme.

William is a consultant in project management and dispute avoidance with Project ADR and Engineers Ireland Dispute Resolution panel Member. He is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, CIArb Irish Branch committee member and Chair of the Project Mediation & Dispute Avoidance Special Interest Group

Finola McCarthy is a Partner with Ronan Daly Jermyn and advises on all forms of construction and engineering projects.

Both William and Finola are experienced practitioners in construction procurement and dispute resolution and will provide an update on the latest developments in this critical area.

Admission

Free and all are welcome to attend!
For more information visit Engineers Ireland

Conference – Dispute Avoidance in Construction

Tue, 10 Jun 2025 10:15:29 GMT

Conference – Dispute Avoidance in Construction

About the event

Differences will always occur on construction projects and parties require solutions. Dispute avoidance methods and early intervention in construction disputes can allow works to proceed without delay or extra costs. With increased investment in construction and infrastructure and the resurgence of the Irish construction industry, the need for practical guidance on dispute avoidance and non – litigious dispute resolution methods cannot be underestimated. This a rapidly developing area, internationally with FIDIC, ICC, CIArb and others promoting Dispute Avoidance Boards, and at home in Ireland with the introduction of Project Boards, Standing Conciliator in Public Works Contracts, and the increased use of mediation for construction disputes. Conference which is a collaboration between Engineers Ireland and the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators – Irish Branch will give delegates information on developments in this area, in the Irish context and what is international best practice.

More information

For schedule information and booking, please download the conference agenda by clicking here .

Sell Out Conference – CIArb / EI Dispute Avoidance in Construction

drashti.pxmatrix@gmail.com (Drashti Kadiya) — Tue, 10 Jun 2025 10:05:51 GMT

Sell Out Conference – CIArb / EI Dispute Avoidance in Construction

The CIArb Special Interest Group (SIG) in Dispute Avoidance and Project Mediation held a sell -out Conference (approximately 120 delegates) in collaboration with Engineers Ireland (EI) on Friday last the 24 ^th March entitled ‘Dispute Avoidance in Construction’. The event which had a stellar line up of speakers and provided delegates with an opportunity to learn about developments in the Irish context and international best practice in this rapidly developing area. The organisers for this successful event comprised of Billy Morrissey FCIArb (Chairman, CIArb SIG), Siobhan Fahey FCIArb, Chair EI Dispute Resolution Board and Gerard Monaghan FCIArb, Chairman – Ireland Branch. They were ably assisted by a professional Engineers Ireland CPD team at Clyde Road and Jennifer Crowther at the CIArb Branch headquarters amongst others.

The theme of this first event in a series (further events are planned by the SIG in collaboration with other professional bodies and the industry) was to explore new methods of dispute resolution necessary to return control of disputes to project level; to reduce or eliminate formal claims which are costly and time consuming on projects with an emphasis on early recognition and resolution of problems and disputes including early warning systems to pick up issues needing attention.

The Conference was opened by Gerard Monaghan and Siobhan Fahey who moderated the various segments of the conference with assistance from Gerry O Brien FCIArb, EI Conciliator.

Billy Morrissey, EI Conciliator from Project ADR set the scene for the day with a ‘tour de force’ on disputes in construction providing great insights and data on the causes of such conflicts and why they could be better managed at project level. This was enhanced by gems from Billy’s four decades as a project engineer in construction and laterally as an ADR professional.

David O Brien from the Office of Government Procurement outlined the latest changes introduced into the Public Works Suite of Contracts to maximise Dispute Avoidance such as the position of Standing Conciliator in certain contracts. He comprehensively outlined the Department’s policies in this area and made it clear that he was there to listen and this was a great opportunity for engagement on the matter. Throughout the day, David interacted with the audience and the speakers and the feedback should hopefully be reflected in future reviews of the PWC suite of contracts.

Professor Nael Bunni, as expected gave a very thorough outline of his theory on ‘Disputology’ and how it can be applied to dispute avoidance in construction and went on to provide a detailed guideline of the role of ‘Standing Conciliator ‘ , the ‘Project Board’ and how he expects them to work; this is a guideline that should be in every ADR professional’s toolbox and was ‘lapped up’ by the delegates.

Hank Fogarty and Tim Ahern, Engineers and Conciliators from the EI Dispute Resolution Panel set out their stall on the role of the ‘Standing Conciliator’ from the Employers perspective (Tim) and the Contractors perspective (Hank) with some very interesting insights; both speakers were not afraid ‘to call a spade a spade’. All agreed (including Prof. Bunni) that the policy of referring matters to the standing conciliator after the Engineer’s / Architect’s determination is not helpful for dispute avoidance and the Standing Conciliator should have a role earlier in conflicts to assist resolution while such conflicts are fresh and before they develop into more hardened positions and formalise.

Helen Kilroy, Solicitor opened the delegates eyes and showed them the way on the power of mediation in construction disputes, outlining the very high success rates from her ‘mediation log’ in construction mediation, albeit generally at the end or after the project completion.

In the afternoon, Dr Brian Bond continuing his ‘crusade’ updated delegates with statistics from his research on ‘the pros and cons’ of Conciliation in Ireland and once again clearly showed how the process needs to be an integral part of Dispute Avoidance and Resolution going forward.

Siobhan Fahey (wearing her FIDIC hat) and Dick Aphun (FIDIC Presidents List Adjudicator) who joined us from Italy then gave the delegates a very comprehensive and practical overview of the Dispute Avoidance Boards (DAB) in the FIDIC contracts which are written by engineers and how these measures are developing further in the dispute avoidance arena. Dick who travels the world from Africa to the Far East to Eastern Europe regaled the audience with stories and insights.

The last session was opened by Murray Armes, internationally renowned Adjudicator, ADR practitioner and Architect from the UK. Murray outlined the great success of the dispute avoidance boards and partnership arrangements put in place to deliver the London Olympics 2012 infrastructure which stands out as a beacon in construction dispute avoidance. The presentation also gave detailed insights into the legal reasons why structures had to be set up in certain ways which provided welcome knowledge to the audience and prompted ‘lively’ discussion, to put it mildly.

The speaker line up for the day was wrapped up by Tom Carey FCIArb (daa plc). Tom concentrated on collaboration and partnerships in contracting with ADR and made a welcome case supported by statistics as to why we should strive for ‘an integrated team – working approach to achieve value for all partners by reducing duplication and waste of resources’. Tom concentrated on the theme for the day that ‘prevention is better than cure’ and echoed the point outlined earlier by Billy Morrissey, Hank Fogarty, and others that there needs to be trust and confidence in the industry and that contractors are entitled ‘make a reasonable profit’ if the construction industry is to survive and provide the built assets required by society

So, the journey continues for the SIG on Dispute Avoidance and credit is due to the Branch Committee and Gerard Monaghan in supporting this initiative and once again putting the Institute and its members at the forefront of ADR.

Why dispute avoidance is vital in the high-risk construction sector

Tue, 10 Jun 2025 09:41:28 GMT

Why dispute avoidance is vital in the high-risk construction sector

Up to recently, the emphasis has been on the resolution of claims and contested cases rather than early recognition and resolution of problems and disputes on construction projects.

We need to get back on track; it is vital to use current and available people and documents which are directly relevant and, where possible, return control of disputes to project level and proactively manage the relationship between risk allocation and behavioural attitudes.

Construction is a high-risk business. Delays and differences between parties are common. By its very nature, the delivery of a construction project is a dynamic process, this requires members of the team to work together to continually fine-tune and adjust the detailed project requirements, designs and construction methods, sequence, resources, and logistics. Project teams are usually created from scratch for each project.

There are many reasons for disputes, the most common being:

Failure to properly administer the contract;
Poorly drafted or incomplete and unsubstantiated claims;
Errors and/or omissions in the contract documents;
Incomplete design information or employer requirements (for design and build);
Employer/contractor/subcontractor failing to understand and/or comply with its contractual obligations;
Unforeseen or differing ground conditions and utility infrastructure relocation issues;
Actions/inactions of third parties/practice of agencies.

The avoidance of or the fair and timely resolution of construction disputes can reduce administrative and other costs benefiting the public, the employer and the contractor. We need to find ways to settle a higher percentage of disputes on projects at their inception before they become formal adjudications, arbitrations, or lawsuits.

Parties need to identify methods for timely dispute avoidance, recognition, and resolution during the currency of projects.

Unrealistic expectations regarding construction projects

It is not realistic to expect construction projects to run perfectly. The expectation should be that the project manager should identify problems and quickly take appropriate action. Confidence is critical on construction projects and this is a quality that often determines the difference between success and failure.

All too often, projects fail to achieve their goals because of indecision and uncertainty. Unfortunately, not enough project managers are trained or equipped to measure communication effectiveness; technical reporting on its own provides an impersonal one-dimensional view.

Project managers should lean towards people and action; relationships are key. But parties may fail to see eye-to-eye at any point during a contract. We must focus on avoiding disputes in the pre-and post-contract stages.

No two construction projects are alike — drawings, specifications, ground conditions, building methods, the trades involved and the goals of the participating parties all differ. Construction projects are unique, covering a wide spectrum of products and skills, carried out in a profit oriented, commercially aware environment.

Projects are usually executed by organisations with opposing objectives, by individuals with different cultures, experiences and backgrounds, executing complex operations in difficult environments. Decisions are generally made on forecasts of future expectations, more often than not when the information needed to make those decisions is cloudy at best.

The scope for uncertainty and change is high in construction and the risk of conflict and escalating disputes is ever present. Ambiguities and/or discrepancies in the contract documents, design changes, unknown ground conditions, defects, delay and disruption issues may all give rise to conflict.

The ‘handshake agreement’ of the past is rare, replaced today by a complex set of contract documents regulating the parties’ dispute. Regulation of dispute management is seemingly preferred to dispute avoidance!

Why does dispute avoidance matter?

Construction disputes cost money. The costs are direct (legal services, adjudication, arbitration, advisers and in – house resources) and indirect. The direct costs can be substantial and often dwarf the initial claim itself.

Some of the indirect costs include: adverse performance, reduced morale, erosion of confidence and trust in working relationships, delays to the project, negative reputational impact, emotional impact on people involved and the loss of people to the industry because of wasted effort, disillusionment and frustration and lost opportunities for future work due to the destruction of business relationships.

If such unnecessary expense and waste of resources can be avoided the same capital and human resource pool could be released to produce significantly more public and private infrastructure and services.

Risk averse contracts which attempt to transfer risk within the control or influence of the party transferring the risk tend to be entirely counterproductive and can lead directly and indirectly to project inefficiency, quality issues, delays, costs, and disputes; it is preferable that parties remain proactively engaged and in control of risk management throughout the life of a project.

Figure 1 shows the high costs and time involved in formal dispute resolution procedures.

An organisation’s underlying policy objective should be:

Developing realistic plans and schedules, maintaining their accuracy, and dealing with delays and other ‘claims’ contemporaneously;
Ensuring that the contract contains a process to resolve issues at project level;
Ensuring process and procedural fairness at all times;
If necessary, escalate the conflict or issue to a more senior level;
Employing every endeavour to resolve issues by negotiation while they are fresh;
Using skilled facilitators, standing conciliators and dispute boards to assist in resolving issues; and
If formal dispute resolution is inevitable, selecting the most appropriate method to achieve an early, and non-project disruptive solution.

These matters must be considered at contract formation, not when a conflict or difference arises.