From Disparity to Harmonisation of Construction Industry Payment Legislation in Australia: A Proposal for a Dual Process of Adjudication based upon Size of Progress Payment Claim

Coggins, Jeremy

doi:10.5130/ajceb.v11i2.1939

Cited by 35 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…ix This correlates with similar findings in Australian research -see, for example, Brand and Uher (2010: 17). x Such a model, which affords greater legislation protection to smaller contractors, was proposed by Coggins (2011). Furthermore, Queensland is the only jurisdiction to date to have introduced a dual payment/adjudication system which affords greater protection for smaller payment claims -see Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Queensland).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Project bank accounts: the second wave of security of payment?

Griffiths

Lord

Coggins

2017

JFMPC

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study is to identify building contractors’ views as to the need for, impact of and barriers to the use of project bank accounts (PBAs) in the UK construction industry. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional research study was carried out by the use of questionnaires to collect quantitative data. The population for the research was of construction professionals working as full-time employees for either main (Tier 1) or specialist contractors (Tiers 2-4). Findings Contractors consider PBAs as an effective initiative to encourage fair payment. There is uncertainty, however, as to whether PBAs will result in project cost savings. Head contractor resistance is perceived to be the biggest barrier to the use of PBAs. Adoption of PBAs in private-sector construction projects is likely to be slow. Research limitations/implications The relative infancy of PBA usage in the construction industry means that responses are largely based on awareness as opposed to experience. Nevertheless, survey data represent a snapshot of contractors’ perceptions with respect to PBAs, which may be used as a benchmark against which to compare future studies to monitor how contractors’ views and expectations have changed with time. Originality/value The survey results will be of particular interest to those international jurisdictions who are considering, or who have already embarked on, the path of trialling and/or using PBAs in the public sector.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Project bank accounts: the second wave of security of payment?

Griffiths

Lord

Coggins

2017

JFMPC

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Statutory Adjudication In Western Australia: Adjudicators' Vmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Geographically in Australia, all states in the east and south followed one model while Western Australia and Northern Territory followed another. Therefore the two models were sometimes known 56 ECAM 22,1 as "East Coast Model" and "West Coast Model" (Coggins, 2011;Coggins and Donohoe, 2012;Coggins et al, 2010;Speranza, 2011;Zhang, 2009). These names might not be appropriate when we include the UK, New Zealand and Singapore in the discussion.…”

Section: Two Distinct Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interestingly, the laws in the Australian East Coast Model are all titled "building and construction industry security of payment acts", while laws in the UK Model are mostly known as "construction contracts acts". Table I Provides a statutory progress payment claim procedure which cannot be contracted out Does not provide a statutory progress payment claim procedure Provides a rapid adjudication procedure Provides a rapid adjudication procedure Major characteristics Davenport (2007), Davenport (2011) Davenport (2007), Brand and Davenport (2011) It is a certification process/defined scheme It is a traditional process/ non-specific scheme Mirrors contractual certification process: the role of adjudicator is that of a payment certifier Does not specify that only one party can make claim Does not limit to progress payment Only applies to progress payment claims made up the contractual link Bell and Vella (2010) and Speranza (2011) More evaluative/investigative in nature Pay now, (maybe) argue later Coggins et al (2010), Coggins (2011), Coggins andDonohoe (2012) Restricted to consider the law, the contract, and documents duly submitted Evaluation Davenport (2007), Brand and Davenport (2011) Davenport (2007), Brand and Davenport (2011) Imbalance is not a problem More expensive, an adjudication in UK can be 20 times more expensive than one in East Coast Model Coggins et al (2010), Coggins (2011), Coggins and Donohoe (2012) Higher level of procedural and substantive justice Limited in scope, enables rapid and relatively inexpensive adjudication of progress claims Imbalance as only one party can make claims Can be abused by claimant to submit "ambush claim" or to claim damages Unjustified incursion of freedom of contract Coggins et al (2010), Coggins (2011), Coggins and Donohoe (2012) Generates significant consequential administrative and legal burdens upon the industry Lack of procedural and substantive justice Effective in terms of swift and cheap resolution of progress payment claims Coggins and Donohoe (2012). There have also been comparisons of the NSW Act with laws in other countries.…”

Section: Two Distinct Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interestingly, although all legislations modelled the UK Act in one way or another, there are some major differences in the legislative models in different states of Australia. The two models are sometimes known as "East Coast Model" and "West Coast Model" (Coggins, 2011;Coggins and Donohoe, 2012;Coggins et al, 2010;Speranza, 2011;Zhang, 2009). There are calls for a national legislation (Zhang, 2009;Bell and Vella, 2010) and there have been a number of proposal for a dual system which incorporates mechanisms in both models (Davenport, 2007;Brand and Davenport, 2011;Coggins, 2011;Coggins et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Statutory adjudication in Western Australia: adjudicators’ views

Yung

Rafferty²

2015

Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2015),"Risk management implementation in small and medium enterprises in the UK construction industry", Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 22 Iss 1 pp. 91-107 http:// dx.Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emeraldsrm:333301 [] For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the effectiveness of the statutory adjudication legislation in Western Australia against its stated aims. Design/methodology/approach -The four objectives of the Western Australia Construction Contracts Act 2004 were identified. For each objective a number of criteria has been devised. In total, 22 registered adjudicators were interviewed, representing 28 per cent of all adjudicators in Western Australia. The interviewees were divided into two groups, one with legal background (being both lawyer and adjudicator), the other without (construction professionals). They were asked to evaluate the criteria against a five-point Likert scale in addition to open ended comments. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to examine whether there were significant differences between the two groups. Annual reports of Building Commissioner, database of the WA State Administrative Tribunal and some law cases were also referred to. Findings -It is found that the West Coast Model is fair to both parties, the adjudications are generally completed speedily according to the prescribed timeframe, and they have been conducted in various levels of formalities. Adjudications are very cost effective for larger claims. However, they are not so for smaller claims. The increasing uptake rate shows that adjudication is getting more popular, while the low appeal rate shows that decisions on dismissal are fair.Research limitations/implications -The adjudicators' opinions are only part of the overall picture and that more research on this topic needs to be done. Originality/value -There have been two distinct legislative models in Australia, commonly known as East Coast Model and West Coast Model. A number of authors have called for a national dual model incorporating both current models. However, it might be too early to discuss the national dual model when there have...

show abstract

Contract Law

Stewart¹,

Swain²,

Fairweather³

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From Disparity to Harmonisation of Construction Industry Payment Legislation in Australia: A Proposal for a Dual Process of Adjudication based upon Size of Progress Payment Claim

Cited by 35 publications

References 11 publications

Project bank accounts: the second wave of security of payment?

Project bank accounts: the second wave of security of payment?

Statutory adjudication in Western Australia: adjudicators’ views

Contract Law

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About