dc.description.abstract | The climatic dispute of force majeure is among the most commonly seen courting construction. This work observes that the deciding factor of judgment in court often resides in the power of evidence rendered by the parties. That is, the verdict is for the party who is capable of presenting logically connected or relevant evidence, demonstrating a due care in contract.
The interesting question here is lawyers generally lack the background knowledge of construction specific issues and are also too late to be involved in solving the case, so that presenting a good case is ever more costly than necessary. Further, without convincing evidence, the court is incapable of giving a judgment. The suit must undergo rounds of time-consuming fact-finding procedures. The cost of resolving a dispute is uncontrollable, if a fair ruling can really be afforded by both parties.
This work collects relevant lawsuit cases regarding disputes primarily of climatic causes of force majeure. By analyzing these cases, this work is able to identify three weather related parameters as stereotypes, namely, typhoon, storms and extended rainfalls. A total of 180 causation combination corresponding factors, including (1) the weather forecast, (2) possibility of taking preventive measures, (3) temporal relationships between cause and damage, and (4) locality relationship between cause and damage, are generated, and each of which individually examined.
The outcome of this analysis is compared and effort is given to categorizing these combinations. The idea is, by categorization, construction practitioners are able to document and prepare evidence for potential disputes before bring them to court or seeking expensive legal aids. Not only documentation cost is controlled, but comprehensiveness of documentation is ensured. In sum, , this work classifies 10 categories of evidentiary procedures related to typhoon, 14 to storms, 7 to extended rainfalls. It is concluded that the outcome of this work will aid practitioners in gathering necessary information, aligned with legal procedures, so that costs of dispute resolution can be reduced. | en_US |