Analysis of Claims in Public Works Construction Contracts in India
Main Article Content
Abstract
Majority of construction works are carried out through contracts and most of public works in India are modeled on General Conditions of Contract (GCC) formulated by Central Public Works Department (CPWD). Such Public Works Contracts have inherent limitations of being adapted on case to case and thus, are perceived to be rigid and prone to disputes. An attempt has been made to understand and evaluate the relationship between contract conditions and different claims that are usually encountered in construction disputes. An assessment has been done to determine the root cause of various claims with respect to contract conditions with a view of suggesting certain changes in GCC for effective contract management. Twenty two disputes in arbitration from CPWD have been considered and the claims subject to arbitration were studied and analysed. Classification and categorisation of claims was done and frequency of claims, quantum of amount claimed and amount awarded were determined for each type which was then related with the conditions of contract guiding them. Suggestions have been put forward on the basis of limited study as changes that can be made in GCC of CPWD, for avoiding the claims to arise in the first place.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Assaf, S.A. and Al-Hejji, S. (2006). Causes of delay in large construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 24(4): 349–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.11.010.
Brown, H. and Marriott, A. (1999). ADR Principles and Practice. London: Sweet and Maxwell.
Cheung, S.O. and Yiu, T.W. (2006). Are construction disputes inevitable? IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 53(3): 456–470. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2006.877445.
Conlin, J., Lanford, D.A. and Kennedy, P. (1996). The Sources, Causes and Effects of Construction Disputes: A Research Project. London: Construction Industry Board.
Diekmann, J., Girard, M. and Abdul-Hadi, N. (1994). Disputes potential index: A study into the predictability of contract disputes. Construction Industry Institute Source Document 101. Texas: Construction Industry Institute.
Gupta, P., Gupta, R. and Netzer, T. (2009). Building India: Accelerating Infrastructure Projects. Mumbai: McKinsey and Company, Inc.
Heath, B., Hills, B. and Berry, M. (1994). The origin of conflict within the construction process. International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB) Publication 171, Proceedings of First Plenary Meeting of TG-15. The Netherlands: CIB.
Hellard, R.B. (1987). Managing Construction Conflict. Harlow, UK: Longman Scientific Tech.
Hewitt, R. (1986). Winning Construction Disputes: Strategic Planning for Major Litigation. London: Arthur Young.
Indianconstructionindustry.com. (2007). Indian construction industry overview. Available at: http://www.indianconstructionindustry.com/overview.html.
Iyer, K., Chaphalkar, N. and Joshi, G. (2008). Understanding time delay disputes in construction contracts. International Journal of Project Management, 26(2): 174–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.05.002.
Jones, S.R. (1994). How constructive is construction law? Construction Law Journal, 10(1): 28–38.
Kumaraswamy, M.M. (1997). Common categories and causes of construction claims. Construction Law Journal, 13(1): 21–34.
Mitkus, S. and Mitkus, T. (2014). Causes of conflicts in a construction industry: A communicational approach to contemporary issues in business management and education. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 110: 777–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.922.
Mururu, N. (1991). Anatomy of a construction dispute. Arbitration, November: 262– 264.
Newey, J. (1992). The construction industry. In P. Fenn and R. Gameson (eds.), Construction Conflict Management and Resolution. London: E & FN Spon, 20–23.
Odeh, A.M. and Battaineh, H.T. (2002). Causes of construction delays: Traditional contracts. International Journal of Project Management, 20(1): 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(00)00037-5.
Planning Commission, Government of India. (2008). Eleventh Five Year Plan 2007– 2012. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). (2014). Industrial and Infrastructure Construction in India. Kolkata, India: PwC.
Project Management Institute (PMI) (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide). 6th Ed. Newtown Square, PA: PMI.
Rephan, J. (2011). Arbitration of construction disputes. Pender and Coward, September.
Saurabh, S. (2001). Arbitration and Claim Management. New Delhi: Department of Building Engineering and Management, School of Planning and Architecture (SPA) Delhi.
Semple, C., Hartman, F.T. and Jergeas, G. (1994). Construction claims and disputes: Cause and cost/time overruns. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 120(4): 785–795. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1994)120:4(785).
Spittler, J.R. and Jentzen, G.H. (1992). Dispute resolution: Managing construction conflict with step negotiations. AACE International Transactions, 1: D.9.1–10.
Surawongsin, P. (2002). The implementation of construction claims management in the Thai construction industry. MEng diss. Asian Institute of Technology.
Sykes, J. (1996). Claims and disputes in construction. Construction Law Journal, 12(1): 3–13.
Tillet, G. (1991). Resolving Conflict: A Practical Approach. Sydney: Sydney University Press.
Watts, V.M. and Scrivener, J.C. (1993). Review of Australian building disputes settled by litigation. Building Research and Information, 21(1): 59–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613219308727257.
Yates, D.J. (1998). Conflict and dispute in the development process: A transaction cost economic perspective. Available at: http://business2.unisa.edu.au/prres/Proceedings/Proceedings1998/Papers/.
Yates, J.K. and Epstein, A. (2006). Avoiding and minimizing construction delay claim disputes in relational contracting. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 132(2): 168–179. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2006)132:2(168).