Decoding Construction Dispute Cases on Defects: Courts' Key Decision-Shaping Elements and Practical Takeaways

The construction industry is witnessing a growing susceptibility to claims and disputes coupled with a progressive increase in stakeholders resorting to legal actions. In the Middle East (ME), average values for construction disputes have risen significantly, and the periods for dispute resolution have become notably lengthy. Considering that defects often act as a key trigger for claims, it is expected that a significant number of ME's claims/disputes will be equally defect-related. The reported literature has not delved into such types of construction disputes, specifically in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) context, resulting in considerable ambiguities surrounding the topic. The purpose of this study is to gain a greater insight into the judicial reasoning and the decision-shaping elements in the UAE's defect-related construction dispute cases. Toward that purpose, we conducted a thorough review of a variety of construction dispute cases involving design defects, construction defects, and/or materials and equipment defects. The study identified the key elements utilized or depended upon by the court in its decision in relation to each case plea. The findings revealed the expert reports, UAE law articles, and contractual terms as key elements affecting the plea's outcome, both favorably and unfavorably, in defect-related construction cases. Additionally, the study offered insights and practical takeaways to stakeholders who are actively engaged in UAE construction projects and disputes. The work outcome is of particular significance to the contractor and the client, as it can support their decision-making in future defect-related disputes.