Unveiling the Root Causes of Arbitration Failures in Construction Contracts

Arbitration is often employed as the definitive form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in construction disputes, largely due to the technical complexity of issues, procedural formalities, and considerations of enforceability. However, recent studies and industry trends have illuminated significant deficiencies in its practical application within the construction sector. This study aims to investigate the root causes of these shortcomings within the context of the construction industry and to propose recommendations for enhancing current arbitration practices. To this end, a comprehensive literature review was conducted to scrutinize the inherent drawbacks of arbitration procedures in construction disputes. This was followed by a quantitative research methodology involving a questionnaire survey administered to thirty number of Sri Lankan construction professionals with direct involvement in international and domestic arbitration processes. This approach facilitated the accumulation of industry perceptions regarding overall user satisfaction, identification of the most significant drawbacks encountered by parties, and recommendations for improving construction arbitration procedures. The findings revealed overall satisfaction within the industry toward the arbitration process, while also highlighting the presence of certain drawbacks. International arbitration was particularly criticized for high procedural costs and legal fees, whereas domestic arbitration was found inadequate due to procedural delays and administrative inefficiencies. This study identified nine root causes exerting significant influence on these drawbacks. Accordingly, this study brings forth several recommendations as means of improvement for these identified drawbacks, including the conduct of prehearing meetings, the incorporation of project-specific arbitration clauses, the involvement of construction industry experts as arbitrators and legal consultants, and the development of local arbitration institutions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Published
2026-01-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1061/jladah.ladr-1412
Primary Topic
Construction Project Management and Performance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Unveiling the Root Causes of Arbitration Failures in Construction Contracts

Udayangani Kulatunga, Akila Pramodh Rathnasinghe, Charuka Deshan Jayalath, Dinusha Perera
Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Construction Project Management and Performance
article

Unveiling the Root Causes of Arbitration Failures in Construction Contracts

Udayangani Kulatunga, Akila Pramodh Rathnasinghe, Charuka Deshan Jayalath, Dinusha Perera
article en

Abstract

Arbitration is often employed as the definitive form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in construction disputes, largely due to the technical complexity of issues, procedural formalities, and considerations of enforceability. However, recent studies and industry trends have illuminated significant deficiencies in its practical application within the construction sector. This study aims to investigate the root causes of these shortcomings within the context of the construction industry and to propose recommendations for enhancing current arbitration practices. To this end, a comprehensive literature review was conducted to scrutinize the inherent drawbacks of arbitration procedures in construction disputes. This was followed by a quantitative research methodology involving a questionnaire survey administered to thirty number of Sri Lankan construction professionals with direct involvement in international and domestic arbitration processes. This approach facilitated the accumulation of industry perceptions regarding overall user satisfaction, identification of the most significant drawbacks encountered by parties, and recommendations for improving construction arbitration procedures. The findings revealed overall satisfaction within the industry toward the arbitration process, while also highlighting the presence of certain drawbacks. International arbitration was particularly criticized for high procedural costs and legal fees, whereas domestic arbitration was found inadequate due to procedural delays and administrative inefficiencies. This study identified nine root causes exerting significant influence on these drawbacks. Accordingly, this study brings forth several recommendations as means of improvement for these identified drawbacks, including the conduct of prehearing meetings, the incorporation of project-specific arbitration clauses, the involvement of construction industry experts as arbitrators and legal consultants, and the development of local arbitration institutions.

Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and ConstructionVol. 18(2)
GenVec (US), University of Moratuwa (LK), Northumbria University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 91%
Construction Project Management and Performance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.