Difficulties often arise during the realization of construction tasks for public orders, linked with public financing and the necessity to comply with Public Procurement Act. Employers often base public procurement agreement drafts on FIDIC Conditions of Contracts, with are composed of General Conditions and Particular Conditions. These conditions require the appointment of the Dispute Adjudication Board, whose task is to settle disputes quickly. Our "construction reality" gives rise to disputes more and more often from year to year. Disputes arise during each phase of task realization, and once tasks are completed, during the statutory warranty period. What to do in order to avoid the escalation of disputes and termination of agreement due to disputes? First of all is good to keep in mind that all conflicts can be solved or pacified, and that disputes are disadvantageous for both parties.
It is here that the Adjudicator comes in handy: a person that helps parties settle disputes, solve conflicts, and draw the parties' attention to the fact that conflict will surely hinder completion of tasks outlined in their contract. The Adjudicator uses his or her knowledge and experience to make decisions concerning disputed matters, in an impartial manner, which is the foundation of an amicable settlement - a cheap and quick alternative to in-court settlements.
The Adjudicator, a member of the Dispute Adjudication Board,, can act - in the main - alone or as part of a 3-person group. The type of appointed DAB and its activities depends on the terms of the signed contract. It is very important that both parties choose and approve of the committee knowingly, outline its tasks and competences, its wages, as well as the time and place of DAB meetings. My professional experience allows me to state that appointing an Dispute Adjudication Board, right after a contract is signed is easier for both parties and implies that both parties are willing to cooperate on good terms. A DAB appointed for the entire contracted period is aware of conflicts as soon as they arise. It is thus easier for such a committee to solve such conflicts, as it is involved in contract realization from the very beginning. As far as the costs of such a committee are concerned - these costs are not very high, and are surely lower than the costs of in-court settlements. The situation is not as easy for an Dispute Adjudication Board, appointed ad hoc in order to settle a concrete matter. The manner of paying such a committee is also different; as it issues a decision concerning only the dispute is had been appointed for. Parties can either agree with the committee's decision, or disagree with it.