Abstract
Abstract Electronic data interchange (EDI—paperless trading using computer networks) demands different forms of dispute settlement than the traditional jurisdiction, such as court hearings and arbitration. We argue that the less traditional ways of dispute settlement, known as ADR (Delden, 1988), are more appropriate than (traditional) adjudication. ADR has already been successfully applied, amongst others, in conflicts arising from failed automation projects. We will, therefore, evaluate various aspects of forms of problem‐solving presently available, in the context of specific characteristics of automation projects. The very nature of projects undertaken in the automation industry, especially the complexity and the length of the contract, requires that factors such as continuity and the aim of the project are taken into account. Recent developments in automation, like EDI, have resulted in a shift in trading patterns, making the traditional legal instruments appear to be increasingly inadequate. This ra...
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
