TY - JOUR
T1 - Critical Review of Meeting the Specified Objectives of the Irish Construction Contracts Act 2013
T2 - An Adjudication Perspective
AU - Ryan, Cathal
AU - Spillane, John P.
AU - Bradley, James G.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 American Society of Civil Engineers.
PY - 2025/11/1
Y1 - 2025/11/1
N2 - The Construction Contracts Act 2013 is Irish legislation designed to regulate payments under construction contracts. Its primary purpose is to provide a mechanism whereby prior notice of an intention to withhold sums from payments otherwise due must be given. Lawmakers specified objectives they believed the act would achieve, including providing a rapid and effective means of dispute settlement and relieving pressure from the court system, among others. This research gathers opinions from legal professionals experienced in working with adjudication under the act to determine whether they believe the objectives are being met. Thirty-one semistructured interviews were conducted with adjudication experts. The consensus among participants is that three objectives have been achieved, two are unachieved, while two are partially achieved. The findings highlight supposed shortcomings of the legislation, such as the omission of a sanction for nonresponse. Additionally, systemic issues potentially hindering the legislation's success, such as cultural resistance toward adjudication, are raised. The research offers recommendations to address legislative flaws and proposes strategies to mitigate barriers to adjudication's effectiveness. This research should encourage lawmakers to investigate these issues and implement changes to improve the legislation's effectiveness.
AB - The Construction Contracts Act 2013 is Irish legislation designed to regulate payments under construction contracts. Its primary purpose is to provide a mechanism whereby prior notice of an intention to withhold sums from payments otherwise due must be given. Lawmakers specified objectives they believed the act would achieve, including providing a rapid and effective means of dispute settlement and relieving pressure from the court system, among others. This research gathers opinions from legal professionals experienced in working with adjudication under the act to determine whether they believe the objectives are being met. Thirty-one semistructured interviews were conducted with adjudication experts. The consensus among participants is that three objectives have been achieved, two are unachieved, while two are partially achieved. The findings highlight supposed shortcomings of the legislation, such as the omission of a sanction for nonresponse. Additionally, systemic issues potentially hindering the legislation's success, such as cultural resistance toward adjudication, are raised. The research offers recommendations to address legislative flaws and proposes strategies to mitigate barriers to adjudication's effectiveness. This research should encourage lawmakers to investigate these issues and implement changes to improve the legislation's effectiveness.
KW - Adjudication
KW - Alternative dispute resolution
KW - Subcontractor
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105009592401
U2 - 10.1061/JLADAH.LADR-1343
DO - 10.1061/JLADAH.LADR-1343
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:105009592401
SN - 1943-4162
VL - 17
JO - Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
JF - Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
IS - 4
M1 - 04525059
ER -