Alternative Dispute Resolution: A New Trend for the 90s?

The 1980s will be remembered by many in the construction industry as a time of costly lawsuits, when owner sued contractor, contractor sued sub-contractor, and everyone was forced to pay expensive legal fees. By contrast, the 1990s has seen the construction industry turn to alternative dispute resolution techniques to limit litigation costs in resolving disputes:

• "The American Arbitration Association reports that its construction case filings declined in 1993 for the third year in a row." (ENR, July 11, 1994)
  

• The ABA Forum reports that membership in its construction industry lawyers has leveled off after more than tripling during the 1980s. (Id.)
  

• The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reports that since 1988 it has used a claims prevention technique of project specific "partnering" on 200 construction contracts and has yet to have one claim go to litigation. In addition, since 1986 the Army Corps has reduced its pending contract claims from 1,103 to 426. (Ibid)
  

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR), through mediation, mini-trials, early neutral evaluation, and dispute review boards, must be considered and used as a time and cost saving alternative to trial. No longer should the construction lawyer's immediate response to litigation be formal litigation, with lengthy and costly discovery and with a trial and final resolution almost three to four years away.

Connell Foley LLP always considers alternative dispute resolution when dealing with complicated construction litigation cases. These techniques are less costly to the client and will usually result in a fair and equitable settlement.