ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES: THE CALIFORNIA EXPERIENCE

Construction contract claims litigation is typically viewed as technical, time consuming and costly. As a result, arbitration is being promoted across the country as a fast, fair, inexpensive and decisive alternative to court litigation. It is not only contractors, subcontractors, material suppliers and owners who are advocating arbitration. Legislators, and government officials also view arbitration as a means toward solving the increasing problem of court congestion without the costs of providing more judges and courtroom facilities. For three and one-half years California has been operating under a form of arbitration for resolving contract disputes. The purpose of this paper is to review arbitration generally as a procedure for resolving contract disputes with public agencies as well as California's experience to date. Overall, the arbitration program has been more costly to state agencies, but certainly more expeditious. With a few exceptions the awards have represented good settlements, i.e. they have resulted in larger payments than would be expected from a judicial determination but are less than what the claimant would have accepted as a settlement offer. One can only speculate whether the same results could be achieved through mediation, settlement conferences or nonbinding arbitration. (Author)

  • Corporate Authors:

    Transportation Research Board

    A4005: Committee on Contract Law
    Washington, DC  United States  20418
  • Authors:
    • Finch, O F
  • Publication Date: 1982-7

Media Info

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 00388773
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Files: TRIS, TRB
  • Created Date: Oct 30 1984 12:00AM