ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) IN CONSTRUCTION FAILURE CASES AND LEGAL CONSEQUENCES

Abstrak

This paper analyzes a construction failure case related to the collapse of a transmission tower during erection tower due to a landslide and highlights the potential disputes between the involved parties. This study uses a comparative legal analysis method between Civil Law and Common Law. The Results and Discussion show that in Civil Law, force majeure is interpreted strictly, while Common Law is more flexible by considering mitigation factors. Mediation is effective in reducing conflicts and maintaining cooperative relationships, while arbitration offers a quick and binding resolution compared to litigation. ADR is superior to litigation in terms of time and cost efficiency, making it the preferred choice in construction disputes. The results of this study emphasize the importance of drafting specific contract clauses and selecting appropriate ADR mechanisms. Further research is recommended to evaluate the duration and cost of ADR in various types of infrastructure projects.