Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 10 SEPTEMBER 2013

Conditions Precedent To Dispute Resolution: A Help Or A Hindrance?

Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Contributor
Explore more from Duane Morris LLP

A recent New York appellate decision demonstrates why this clause, employed as a roadblock many years after the dispute arose, should be modified by the AIA.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The AIA A201 General Conditions posit the architect's decision on a claim as a condition precedent to arbitration of that claim.  A recent New York appellate decision demonstrates why this clause, employed as a roadblock many years after the dispute arose, should be modified by the AIA.  In 2013, a party has been told by the appellate court that it must submit its 2005 dispute to the architect before it can proceed to arbitration.  Common sense has flown out the window!

If not modified by the parties, here's how the A201 provides for resolution of disputes. First, the 'Initial Decision Maker" (which normally defaults to the project architect) must render a decision.  This decision is a condition precedent to mediation, and mediation is a condition precedent to arbitration.1 Thus, arbitration cannot go forward, except for certain specified exceptions, unless the architect has issued a decision on the dispute or has failed to do so for 30 days.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from