A Comparison of Dispute Resolution Provisions between the Joint Contract Tribunal and the Iraqi Standard Bidding Document

Abstract

Due to a party's violation of his obligations or responsibilities indicated in the contract, many engineering projects confront extensive contractual disputes, which in turn need arbitration or other forms of dispute resolution, which negatively impact the project's outcome. Each contract has its terms for dispute resolution. Therefore, this paper aims to study the provisions for dispute resolution according to Iraqi (SBDW) and the JCT (SBC/Q2016) and also to show the extent of the difference between the two contracts in the application of these provisions. The methodology includes a detailed study of the dispute settlement provisions for both contracts with a comparative analysis to identify the differences in the application of these provisions between the two contracts. The research results revealed several differences, the most important of which is that the engineer has a dual role in Iraqi (SBDW). On the one hand, he is appointed by the employer to carry out specific duties under the contract. On the other hand, the engineer also has powers related to the settlement of claims and this first level of conflict avoidance between the two parties, Unlike the SBC/Q2016 contract, which appoints a neutral third party to mediate the problem. In addition, resolving disputes between the two parties, according to the ‎Iraqi (SBDW), needs a long time compared with JCT-SBC/Q2016.‎

Keywords

• JCT (SBC/Q2016)
• Iraqi Standard Bidding Documents
• Dispute resolution