International Construction Law Review
INTRODUCTION
HUMPHREY LLOYD
DAVID WIGHTMAN
It is with considerable regret that I have to announce that David Wightman has decided to relinquish being an Editor-in-Chief of The International Construction Law Review
. This is the last issue under David’s editorship. David and I have been the Editors-in-Chief of this Review
since its foundation in 1983. It has been a very harmonious and productive relationship. Happily we have had much in common. Equally each has had a different perspective and different contacts so that we have been able to bring readers a wider range than might otherwise have been possible. In addition I, and in turn, you, our readers, have benefited from David’s perceptive judgment in the selection of material and attention to detail when reviewing articles submitted for publication. David formally retired as a partner of Nabarro Nathanson some years ago but his reputation is such that he remained constantly in demand as a consultant. I am sure that all readers will join me in wishing him, for very many years to come, the full enjoyment of all the advantages of ceasing full time practice.
Fortunately Professor Douglas S Jones, AM, partner of Clayton Utz, primarily based in Sydney, Australia, but active in construction law and arbitration within and well beyond Australia (for which he was honoured in 1999) has agreed to become an Editor-in-Chief. Both David and I are delighted with the appointment. Doug Jones has for some time been a valued member of our Editorial Advisory Board and has written notable contributions for us. Amongst his many appointments he is Vice-President of the Asia-Pacific Council of the London Court of International Arbitration. He will undoubtedly widen still further the extent of our coverage of developments throughout the world.
HUMPHREY LLOYD
We commence with an article from Mr Philip Dunham and Mr Simon Greenberg of Dechert LLP in Paris (page 130), “Balancing Sovereignty and the Contractor’s Rights in International Construction Arbitrations Involving State Entities”, based on a presentation made by Mr Dunham at an ICC/FIDIC conference in October 2005. It addresses a number of issues which may affect a contractor in executing a project with a foreign state entity and in ensuring that the contract documents include an effective and fair means of resolving disputes, if they arise, and enforcing an award made in favour of the contractor. There have been many examples of a contractor seeking redress under a contract’s dispute resolution provisions only to find that he cannot enforce an award properly made, due to the intervention of local courts or because, for example, the foreign state is not a party to the New York Convention. It is surprising that these difficulties have not been the subject of more extensive debate in this Review
and we are grateful to Messrs Dunham and Greenberg for rectifying this. Their paper covers some of the most important issues involved and includes excellent practical advice on how contractors might protect themselves.
At page 150, Mr Panagiotis Verveniotis of G Verveniotis & Partners in Athens writes about a new Law governing Public Private Partnerships. Greece has been the centre for much construction activity recently, not only for the 2004 Olympic Games but also major infrastructure projects such as the Athens International Airport. Many were executed with long-term contracts creating co-operation between the public and private sectors and authorised by legislation passed on a case-by-case basis. They are regarded as successful by both public and private sectors and the new Law introduces an overall legal framework in which future PPPs will
[2006
The International Construction Law Review
128