The implementation of alternative disputeresolution methods by architectural practitioners in South Africa

Abstract

Disputes within the built environment are usually diverse, with their complexity often depending on the number of role players and difficulty of the construction project. Disputes can be resolved through litigation, but this is often costly and time consuming. A study in
2012 reveals that, among others, arbitration, mediation, negotiation and adjudication are different forms of Alternative Dispute- Resolution (ADR) methods preferred and used to resolve disputes in the built environment. This article offers insight into the current preference and application of ADR methods by architectural practitioners in the South African built environment. Registered persons,  as defined by the South African Council for the Architectural Profession (SACAP), formed the population of this study. According to SACAP, a registered person is defined as a person who is registered in one of the categories of professionals and/or candidates. The study will refer to architectural practitioners as a collective population group. A questionnaire survey was distributed to 13 622  registered SACAP professionals and candidates to determine the implementation of ADR methods. This questionnaire was distrusted by the Chief Operations Officer, Mrs Barbara van Stade to the aforementioned SACAP database. The survey response amounted to 396 participating architectural practitioners, resulting in 2.91% of registered architectural professionals and candidates in the South African built environment. Consequently, this is the most comprehensive study on the preferred use of ADR methods by architectural  practitioners in the built environment of South Africa. This study specifically focuses on architectural practitioners who have been  involved in settling disputes between the period of 2012 to 2016. The findings reveal a shifting preference in ADR methods used since what the previous study found in 2012. Although previous studies indicate adjudication as the preferred method to resolve disputes, the data reveals that architectural practitioners increasingly make use of negotiation, followed by mediation and then arbitration. This study identifies current ADR trends, and provides a perspective on the future development of ADR mechanisms for architectural professionals in the South African built environment.

Keywords: Alternative dispute resolution (ADR), architectural practitioners, built environment, South African Council for the  Architectural Profession (SACAP)

Dispute in die konstruksiebedryf is oor die algemeen uiteenlopend en die kompleksiteit daarvan is gewoonlik afhanklik van die aantal rolspelers en moeilikheidsgraad van die konstruksieprojek. Geskille kan soms opgelos word deur litigasie, maar dit is dikwels duur  sowel as tydrowend. ’n Studie in 2012 onthul dat arbitrasie, bemiddeling, onderhandeling en beoordeling onder meer verskillende vorme van alternatiewe geskilbeslegting (ADR) metodes is wat verkies en gebruik word om geskille in die konstruksiebedryf op te los. Hierdie studie bied insig tot die huidige voorkeur en implementering van ADR-metodes soos toegepas deur argitektuurpraktisyns in die Suid-Afrikaanse boubedryf. Geregistreerde persone, soos beskryf deur die Suid-Afrikaanse Raad vir die Argitektuurprofessie (SACAP), het die bevolking van die studie gevorm. Volgens SACAP word ’n geregistreerde persoon gedefinieer as iemand wat  geregistreer is in een van die kategorieë van professionele mense en/of kandidate. ’n Vraelys is versprei na 13 622 geregistreerde SACAP professionele mense en kandidate om die huidige implementering van ADR-metodes te bepaal. Hierdie vraelys is uitgestuur deur die hoofbedryfsbeampte, Mev Barbara van Stade, aan die voorgenoemde SACAP-databasis. Die vraelys is volledig voltooi deur 396 argitektuurpraktisyns en verteenwoordig dus 2.91% van geregistreerde professionele mense en kandidate in die Suid-Afrikaanse  boubedryf. Hierdie is die mees omvattende studie oor die voorkeur en implementering van ADR-metodes soos gebruik deur argitektuurpraktisyns in die bouomgewing van Suid-Afrika. Hierdie artikel fokus spesifiek op argitektuurpraktisyns in die boukunde wat vanaf 2012 tot 2016 by geskilbeslegtigingprosedures betrokke was. Die waarnemings dui op ’n verskuiwing van voorkeur rakende  ADRmetodes sedert die vorige studie se gepubliseerde navorsingsresultate in die gebruik daarvan in 2012. Alhoewel vorige studies onthul dat beoordeling as die mees gekose metode gebruik is, toon die huidige resultate van die studie ’n toenemende gebruik in onderhandeling, gevolg deur bemiddeling/ mediasie en dan arbitrasie. Hierdie studie identifiseer huidige ADR-tendense en bied ’n perspektief op die toekomstige ontwikkeling van ADR-meganismes vir argitektuurpraktisyns in die Suid-Afrikaanse konstruksie- industrie.

Sleutelwoorde: Alternatiewe geskilbeslegtingprosedure (ADR), argitektuurpraktisyns, Suid-Afrikaanse Raad vir die Argitektuurprofessie  (SACAP)