Construction Mediation & Arbitration in Construction Disputes

We represent clients in construction disputes over project delays, cost overruns, change orders, differing site conditions, and more. 

Learn More »

Our attorneys assist clients in avoiding construction contract termination through reliable mediation and arbitration.

Learn More »

While we successfully litigate a wide array of claims, we know when mediation and arbitration are the best paths for construction and design defect cases.

Learn More »

Andrews Myers’ attorneys offer legal counsel for business transactions and contract disputes, including business torts, intellectual property, and collections.

Learn More »

We represent clients in resolving disputes from broken real estate deals, including failed closings, breached purchase agreements, and more.

Learn More »

Our attorneys provide strategic counsel in construction surety and insurance coverage disputes, helping navigate complex claims, bond issues, and payment disputes.

Learn More »

Mediation, arbitration, and litigation are all methods of resolving disputes, but they differ significantly in process and outcome.

In mediation, a neutral mediator helps the parties negotiate a voluntary resolution. The mediator does not decide the case or impose a result. Instead, the parties retain control over whether and on what terms they settle.

In arbitration, a neutral arbitrator (or panel of arbitrators) hears evidence and arguments and issues a binding decision. Arbitration is generally more streamlined and private than litigation, but the arbitrator's decision is usually final and subject to only limited judicial review.

Litigation involves resolving disputes through the court system. Judges and, in some cases, juries decide the outcome. Litigation often provides broader discovery and appellate rights but can be more time-consuming and expensive than alternative dispute resolution.

The best process depends on the nature of the dispute, the parties’ objectives, and any contractual dispute-resolution provisions.

In many cases, yes. Requiring mediation before arbitration or litigation can provide an opportunity to resolve disputes early and avoid the substantial costs associated with formal proceedings.

Construction projects frequently involve ongoing business relationships, complex technical issues, and multiple stakeholders. Mediation allows parties to explore creative business solutions that may not be available through an arbitrator or court.

Even when mediation does not fully resolve a dispute, it often narrows the issues, improves communication, and facilitates later settlement discussions. For these reasons, many construction contracts require mediation as a condition precedent to arbitration or litigation.

Arbitration offers several advantages for construction disputes, particularly those involving complex projects, technical issues, and industry-specific practices.

Parties can select arbitrators with experience in construction law, engineering, scheduling, project management, or other relevant disciplines. Arbitration also typically provides greater flexibility in scheduling, more streamlined procedures, and enhanced confidentiality compared to court proceedings.

In addition, arbitration often reaches a final resolution more quickly than traditional litigation, helping parties reduce uncertainty and focus on completing projects and operating their businesses.

Generally, yes. Arbitration awards are typically enforceable through state and federal courts.

Once an arbitrator issues a final award, a party may seek to have the award confirmed by a court and converted into an enforceable judgment. Courts generally give substantial deference to arbitration awards and may vacate them only in limited circumstances specified by applicable law.

Because arbitration awards are usually final and difficult to overturn, parties should carefully evaluate arbitration provisions before entering into a contract.

A well-drafted arbitration clause can significantly reduce uncertainty and future disputes regarding the dispute-resolution process.

An arbitration provision should clearly identify the types of disputes subject to arbitration, the governing arbitration rules, the number of arbitrators, the location of proceedings, and any requirements regarding mediation before arbitration. Parties may also wish to address confidentiality, discovery limits, consolidation, joinder, and allocation of fees and costs.

Because dispute-resolution clauses can have a substantial impact on future rights and remedies, parties should consult experienced counsel when drafting or reviewing arbitration provisions.

Many business disputes are excellent candidates for mediation, particularly when the parties wish to preserve a commercial relationship or avoid the costs of litigation.

Examples include contract disputes, partnership and shareholder disagreements, payment disputes, construction claims, commercial lease disputes, business tort claims, and conflicts involving closely held companies.

Mediation can be especially effective when both sides want a practical solution that addresses business concerns beyond the legal claims asserted in a lawsuit.

The duration of an arbitration depends on the complexity of the dispute, the amount of discovery required, the number of parties involved, and the availability of witnesses and arbitrators.

Many arbitrations reach a final hearing and award more quickly than comparable court proceedings. While some simple disputes may be resolved within a few months, larger construction and commercial matters can take a year or longer.

One advantage of arbitration is that the parties often have greater flexibility to tailor scheduling and procedures to fit the needs of the case.

The most effective mediator or arbitrator is one whose experience aligns with the nature of the dispute.

Parties should consider the neutral’s substantive knowledge of the industry involved, experience handling similar disputes, reputation for fairness and professionalism, and ability to efficiently manage the process. In construction and commercial matters, experience with contracts, project management, scheduling, payment disputes, delay claims, and business operations can be particularly valuable.

For mediators, strong communication and negotiation skills are essential. A successful mediator helps parties identify risks, evaluate positions realistically, and explore potential resolutions without imposing a decision.

For arbitrators, experience serving as a decision-maker and the ability to evaluate evidence, manage proceedings, and issue clear, well-reasoned awards are especially important.

Ultimately, parties should select a neutral who possesses the experience, judgment, and temperament necessary to help resolve the specific dispute at issue.

Yes. Mediation can be effective in addressing a wide range of employment-related matters, including wrongful termination claims, discrimination and harassment allegations, wage and compensation disputes, restrictive covenant issues, partnership and executive compensation disagreements, and workplace conflicts.

Because mediation is confidential and allows the parties to maintain greater control over the outcome, it can help employers and employees resolve disputes efficiently while avoiding the expense, disruption, and uncertainty of prolonged litigation. Mediation also provides flexibility to craft business and employment solutions that may not otherwise be available.

Even when the parties have strongly differing views of the facts or law, mediation often provides an opportunity to evaluate risks, explore settlement options, and potentially preserve professional relationships.

A well-drafted dispute-resolution clause can help parties avoid unnecessary delays, costs, and procedural disputes when conflicts arise.

By clearly establishing how disputes will be resolved, parties can reduce uncertainty and focus on the merits of the disagreement rather than litigating where, when, or how the dispute should proceed. Effective clauses often address mediation requirements, arbitration procedures, governing law, venue, consolidation and joinder rights, selection of neutrals, and the allocation of fees and costs.

In construction and commercial projects involving multiple contracts and stakeholders, carefully drafted dispute-resolution provisions can also help prevent fragmented proceedings and inconsistent results. Addressing these issues at the contracting stage frequently reduces risk, preserves business relationships, and promotes a more efficient resolution process if a dispute arises.

Many disputes arise not from the merits of the case, but from poorly drafted arbitration provisions.

Common mistakes include failing to clearly identify which disputes are subject to arbitration, omitting the governing arbitration rules, neglecting to address mediation as a prerequisite to arbitration, and failing to specify the number of arbitrators or the location of the proceedings. Parties also frequently overlook important issues such as consolidation, joinder, confidentiality, discovery limitations, and the allocation of fees and costs.

In construction projects, another common mistake is failing to coordinate dispute-resolution provisions across related contracts, which can lead to multiple proceedings involving the same facts and parties. Ambiguous or incomplete provisions often create threshold disputes that increase costs and delay resolution.

Carefully drafted arbitration clauses can help ensure that the dispute-resolution process operates as intended and minimizes the risk of procedural disputes that distract from the underlying issues.