In the past, governments were directly responsible for carrying out projects concerning the construction of public utilities and for delivering public services to people in many areas of social and economic life. However, the budget deficits of governments in countries such as Jordan have required them to seek partners to assist in carrying out these functions. In other words, delivering services to people nowadays often involves contracts being concluded with private sector companies who fund and deliver governmental projects and have the skills and experience to carry out the projects efficiently. When private sector investors decide to enter into contracts with governments, they want to ensure that their investments are protected in case of a dispute with the host government. In this regard, the option to resolve disputes, including the disputes of government contracts, by alternatives to traditional judicial means has increasingly become one of the main incentives for private sector investors considering whether to enter into contracts with governments. This is because Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is more informal, cheaper, faster and easier than the formal procedures which must be adhered to in the court litigation system. Jordan is considered a poor country which has to rely on the private sector to fund its projects but, because ADR is not used in this context, investors may avoid entering into contracts with the Jordanian government, believing that their investments will not be safe. Unlike in Jordan, the use of ADR has been evident in developed countries such as the UK.This thesis argues that Jordan, as a developing country in this area, should look to other countries such as the UK which have more advanced legal systems and legislation, in order to learn from their experience. Therefore, this is a comparative study which will discuss the doctrine of legal transplant and assess whether importing ADR rules and regulations from the UK to Jordan will be an effective way of improving Jordanian laws. Accordingly, this thesis discusses (i) why ADR is not used in government contracts in Jordan and (ii) the role of ADR in settling the disputes of government contracts in the UK. It also (iii) provides solutions and makes recommendations designed to encourage the use of ADR in Jordan, including on whether or not the experience of the UK can be applied in Jordan in this regard.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:764389 |
| Date | January 2015 |
| Creators | Al-Shibli, Farouq |
| Contributors | Thomas, Robert ; Tarawneh, Jasem |
| Publisher | University of Manchester |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Source | https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/en/theses/the-role-and-the-effect-of-alternative-dispute-resolution-mechanism-mediation-and-arbitration-in-administrative-contracts-a-comparative-study-between-the-united-kingdom-and-jordan(4660eeed-4213-4f62-b2f3-ed13f08389a3).html |
Page generated in 0.0015 seconds