• International conference on construction engineering and project management
• /
• 2015.10a
• /
• pp.396-400
• /
• 2015

The Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) (the NSW Act) is a unique form of statutory regulation for the building and construction industry, which gives virtually all industry participants a statutory right to, and a means of recovering, payments for work done under a construction contract. The research aim is to examine current trends in adjudication applications and determinations under the NSW Act. The data used for this study was the collected by the NSW Office of Finance & Services as part of a regular reporting regime for the period from 1 July 2013 and ending on 30 June 2014. With just over 817 adjudication applications having been made over the 2013/14 period, the data indicates that adjudication is being frequently utilized by stakeholders in the NSW building and construction industry as a means of progress payment recovery. Adjudication is proving to be a popular choice for those making claims of less than AU$250,000. Claimants were awarded about 36% of the total of claimed amounts and claimants are generally successful at adjudication in terms of the proportion of the claimed amounts determined in their favour. This is particularly so in relation to claims of less than $100,000, which represents about 70% of the total applications made over the reporting period. The data indicates that adjudication fees are generally modest enough to conclude that adjudication provides claimants across all claim ranges with a relatively inexpensive means of having disputed progress payments determined by an independent adjudicator.

• International conference on construction engineering and project management
• /
• 2005.10a
• /
• pp.687-692
• /
• 2005

The Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) (the Act) is a unique form of statutory regulation for the building and construction industry, which gives virtually all industry participants a statutory right to, and a means of recovering, payments for work done under a construction contract. The research aim is to examine current trends in adjudication applications and determinations under the Act. The research reveals: (a) that the adjudication process is encouraging parties to resolve disputes as to payment (b) that there is low level of awareness and understanding of the provisions of the Act, particularly amongst subcontractors; (c) that claimants making small claims experience a high rate of success at adjudication; and (d) that the indirect cost of adjudication is becoming problematic.

• Journal of Labour Economics
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.83-104
• /
• 2005

The Korean system of labor adjudication on the cases of unfair dismissal and unfair labor practices has been criticized by labor and management in spite of the strong point that the Labor Relations Commission processes the cases quickly. This paper empirically investigates the effectiveness of labor adjudication dealt by the Labor Relations Commission with economic approach. It shows that the grievences of labor and management on the existing labor adjudication system have come from the inadequate processes of labor adjudication rather than the favorable or unfavorable ruling. It also shows that a major deterrent to make an effective labor adjudication system has been not the problems of the selfish attitude and expectation of labor and management but the improper attitude and quality of the member and staff of the Labor Relations Commission.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.113-146
• /
• 2005

Bankruptcy proceedings serve the purpose of the collective satisfaction of the debtor's creditors through the realisation of the debtor's assets and the distribution of the proceeds therefrom. Upon the adjudication bankruptcy, the debtor's right to administer and dispose of the property belonging to the bankruptcy estate shall be vested in the administrator. If a mutual contract was not or not completely fulfilled by the debtor and the other party at the time of the adjudication of bankruptcy, the administrator has right to choose wether to fulfil or terminate the contractual relation. Legal acts that have been conducted prior to the adjudication of bankruptcy and that are detrimental to the debtor's creditors may be contested by the administrator. However, these effects of bankruptcy will have not great influence on the arbitration agreement between the debtor and another party. An arbitration agreement that has been conducted prior to the adjudication of bankruptcy is binding the administrator as an universal legal successor of debtor. Only the arbitration agreement directly disadvantageous to the debtor's creditors may be contested by the administrator. Furthermore, it is not at the discretion of administrator whether or not to submit the dispute to arbitration because an arbitration agreement does not belong under the category of Art. 50 Korean bankruptcy Act which demands a mutual contract. Arbitral proceeding upon the property of the bankruptcy estate and pending for the debtor as plaintiff or against the debtor as defendant at the date of the adjudication of bankruptcy may be taken up at the given status by the administrator. This leads to a change of the party. If a duly summoned party fails to appear in arbitration court, the arbitrator, if satisfied there is no valid excuse, may continue the proceedings and make the award as if all the parties were present. This may be disadvantagious to the debtor's creditors because the arbitral award have the same effects on the participants as the final and conclusive judgement of the court. Even if there is a change of party on side of debtor to the administrator in bankruptcy, the arbitral proceedings will not be automatically postponed or suspended. The matter of how to proceed is at discretion of administrator, when the parties haven't agree on the arbitral proceedings. He can continue the arbitral proceedings without to grant an adjournment of hearing. However, an arbitration award may be challenged by a party dissatisfied and set aside by the court based upon the misconduct that violates the basic rights of the parties to a fair hearing. The arbitrator must treat the parties equally in the arbitral proceedings and give each party a full opportunity to present his case. The arbitrator, therefore, will carefully exercise his discretion in determining whether to continue the arbitral proceedings or to grant a postponing. In the practice, the arbitral proceedings may be usually postponed to grant due process.

• 대한임상약리학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2003.06a
• /
• pp.25-25
• /
• 2003

• Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.12 no.6
• /
• pp.59-66
• /
• 2011

• Journal of the Korean Society of Fisheries and Ocean Technology
• /
• v.56 no.2
• /
• pp.155-162
• /
• 2020

The adjudication of Korean Maritime Safety Tribunal (KMST) was analyzed to collect basic data to identify the cause of the risk that did not appear in the current data provided by the fishermen's occupational accidents of the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperative (NFFC) in stow net fishing vessel from 2015 to 2019. The personnel's carelessness was the most common in 29 out of 33 accidents (87.9%), followed by 25 cases (75.8%) of inadequacy of instructions, 24 cases (72.7%) of inadequacy of education on hazard factor, 20 cases (60.6%) of no personal protection equipment, 18 cases (54.5%) of poor guard, 17 cases (51.5%) of inadequacy of work method, 16 cases (48.5%) of absence of emergency stop button, 14 cases (42.4%) of work practice of poor safety precautions that affected more than 40% of all accidents as accident causes. These causes had a strong influence on each other, and the ratio of accident causes is high. With this relationship, accidents can be prevented or the severity of human injury can be reduced if types of accident process can be estimated with a scenario, and the key points before the accident in the scenario are switched to safe points.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.31 no.2
• /
• pp.47-76
• /
• 2021

India is one of the fast growing country in the world. For the acceleration of economic growth of India, it is indispensable for Indian government to construct infrastructure, such as railroad, airport, harbor, power plant, and water management system. For example, Modi, prime minister of federal government of India proclaimed that Indian government plans to construct 100 smart cities in 2015. In recent times, India is expected to be the largest recipient of Public-Private Partnership(PPP) type projects in the world. Owing to PPP, it is possible for India to pursue her objective to transform the whole economy into digital economy beyond agricultural society. One of major problem related with implementation of PPP type projects is the growth of disputes concomitant to the rising phenomena of PPP type projects in order to build infrastructure in India. Because of this, non-negligible number of projects has been cancelled during last two decades. This study investigates seven failure cases of PPP in India. Those include Nabi mumbai airport, Dabhol power plant, Munbai water project, and Kolkata subway project. Main types of dispute resolution are mediation or conciliation, dispute review board, arbitration, expert adjudication in PPP.

• International conference on construction engineering and project management
• /
• 2011.02a
• /
• pp.350-356
• /
• 2011

Early neutral evaluation (ENE) is a fairly recent form of alternative dispute resolution procedure used in the construction industry. In the UK, ENE is usually carried out on an entirely without prejudice basis, however the parties may agree that any or part of it may be referred to at trial or any subsequent hearing. The early neutral evaluation consists of a preliminary assessment of the issues in dispute for use as a basis for negotiations which may result in a settlement of the dispute. An independent person is appointed by the parties who reviews the case and provides an opinion, in written form and in some detail, with reasons on the merits of the matters in dispute. The opinion is non-binding but provides the parties with what in the opinion of the independent person a formal tribunal may decide whether a court or an arbitrator, if the dispute is not resolved. However, ENE has yet to take off in the construction industry in the UK. This paper will explain this procedure and explore the use of it in the UK and internationally, considering the benefits and drawbacks of its use. It will consider whether or not it is more effective than other early resolution forms such as mediation and adjudication. It will argue and conclude that it is a very useful cost effective procedure, particularly in the resolution of complex disputes, whether local or international.

• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.20 no.6
• /
• pp.107-115
• /
• 2015

A fine is defined to the criminal penalty which is slighter than imprisonment on a system of criminal penalty, but put practically a seat to imprisonment and similar strong discipline contrivance to commission agent in capitalism societies be doing. Also, did heavy commission, but the corporation time, a fine to consider the respect which cannot impose other criminal penalty, and cannot but impose fine penalty only to this corporation carries out art as important criminal penalty than the commission which a person does. But fine drawing of our country cannot carry out art scaring to criminal penalty to rich body as aggregate fine drawing, and a lot of, but do abatement duration of a fine so as same, and be most in spite of adjudication criminal sentence occupying at criminal case adjudication, and difference cannot do to an amount of a fine that is carrying well out the art. Therefore, and have to change to the daily fine systemdm which gained because of total fine system in order to carry out value as modern criminal penalty, and a few fines shall exchange to penalty payment system according to complement department canon of Penal Code, and social accusation protects individual information of low commission agent if so, can normally do art accomplishment of criminal penalty. The system that the maximum can guarantee right of defence of accused has to have to be introduced in procedural a few aspect to pronounce this and a fine. Specially, let explain necessary fact to be related to, and informal procedures understand, and introduction of drawing to be able to get from accord of accused is necessary for accused before charging to informal decree in order cannot be guaranteed right of defence this of accused while consisting in writing of whether accusation and adjudication are procedural at informal procedures, and to supplement respect.