RICS Draft Guidance Note

  • View
    263

  • Download
    3

Embed Size (px)

Text of RICS Draft Guidance Note

  • RICS draft guidance note - Conflict avoidance and dispute resolution

    Table of Contents Acknowledgments RICS guidance notes Introduction

    o Minimum Level of Service

    General Principles: 1 (Knowing)

    o 1.1 Dispute avoidance processes 1.1.1 The spectrum of dispute resolution techniques

    o 1.2 The Three Pillars of Dispute Resolution o 1.3 Dispute Resolution Techniques o 1.4 Alternative Dispute Resolution ('ADR') o 1.5 Standard Form Contracts

    Practical Application: 2 (Doing)

    o Checking the contract documentation o Partnering

    2.1 Dispute Resolution Procedures

    o 2.1.1 The process of negotiation o 2.1.2 Mediation and conciliation o 2.1.3 Mediating construction disputes o 2.1.4 Court annexed ADR o 2.1.5 Adjudication o 2.1.6 Expert determination o 2.1.7 Arbitration o 2.1.8 International commercial arbitration o 2.1.9 Litigation in the TCC

    2.2 Legal costs and recovery

    o 2.1.1 The Pre-Action Protocol for Construction and Engineering Disputes 2.3 Dispute boards

    o 2.3.1 Med-Arb o 2.3.2 Project mediation and standing neutrals o 2.3.3 Arbitration or litigation

    Practical Considerations: 3 (Doing/Advising)

    o 3.1 Dispute escalation clauses o 3.2 Interim valuations and claims o 3.3 Claim evaluation o 3.4 VAT o 3.5 Final account procedures o 3.6 Liability reporting o 3.7 Requesting assistance o 3.8 Finality of dispute resolution o 3.9 Professional negligence

    Endnotes

    https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1053780&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1053844&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1053908&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1053972&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054036&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054100&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054164&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054228&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054292&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054356&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054420&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054484&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054548&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054612&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054676&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054708&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054772&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054836&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054900&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1054964&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055028&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055092&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055156&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055220&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055284&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055348&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055412&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055476&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055540&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055604&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055668&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055732&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055796&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055860&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055924&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1055988&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1056052&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1056116&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1056180&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1056244&sessionid=&voteid=https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/conflict_avoidance/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1053748&partid=1056308&sessionid=&voteid=

  • Acknowledgments RICS would like to thank the following for their contributions to this guidance note: Lead Author Nicholas Gould (Fenwick Elliott LLP)

    Working group

    Chair: Andrew Smith (Laing O'Rourke) Alpesh Patel (APC Coach Ltd) Christopher Green (Capita Symonds Ltd)

    David Cohen (Amicus Development Solutions) Duncan Cartlidge (Duncan Cartlidge Associates) Jim Molloy

    (Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety NI) John G Campbell (BAM Construction Limited) Kevin

    Whitehead (McBains Cooper Consulting Limited) Michael T O'Connor (Carillion Construction Limited) Michelle

    Murray (Turner & Townsend plc) Roy Morledge (Nottingham Trent University) Stuart Earl (Gleeds Cost Management

    Limited)

    RICS guidance notes This is a guidance note. It provides advice to RICS members on aspects of their work. Where procedures are

    recommended for specific professional tasks, these are intended to represent 'best practice', i.e. procedures which in

    the opinion of RICS meet a high standard of professional competence.

    Although members are not required to follow the advice and recommendations contained in the note, they should

    note the following points.

    When an allegation of professional negligence is made against a surveyor, a court or tribunal is likely to take account

    of the contents of any relevant guidance notes published by RICS in deciding whether or not the member had acted

    with reasonable competence.

    In the opinion of RICS, a member conforming to the practices recommended in this note should have at least a partial

    defence to an allegation of negligence if they have followed those practices. However, members have the

    responsibility of deciding when it is inappropriate to follow the guidance.

    Alternatively, it does not follow that members will be found negligent if they have not followed the practices

    recommended in this note. It is for each surveyor to decide on the appropriate procedure to follow in any professional

    task. However, where members do not comply with the practice recommended in this note, they should do so only for

    a good reason. In the event of a legal dispute, a court or tribunal may require them to explain why they decided not to

    adopt the recommended practice. Also, if members have not followed this guidance, and their actions are questioned

  • in an RICS disciplinary case, they will be asked to explain the actions they did take and this may be taken into

    account by the Panel.

    In addition, guidance notes are relevant to professional competence in that each member should be up to date and

    should have knowledge of guidance notes within a reasonable time of their coming into effect.

    Introduction

    This guidance note summa

View more >