“When a dispute arises between the parties in connection with or from the contract or the execution of the works and there is no ATM, whether due to the course of the appointment of the ATM or otherwise, the decisions of the Dispute Settlement Chamber, if they are not executed amicably, normally lead the parties to international arbitration proceedings. Subsections 20.2 to 20.7 define the procedure for the settlement of disputes by a dispute settlement body (“ATM”) appointed ad hoc after a dispute has arisen. The red and pink books ask the parties to set up, from the beginning of the project, a dispute resolution body called “standing board”. Subsection 20.8 provided that, if there was no ATM at the time of the dispute,”. whether because of the course of the at-law appointment or in some other way”, any party could then go to court. The abandonment of the usual approach of a “standing” dispute resolution body was more surprising and was not welcomed by the relevant members of the dispute settlement body.7 But if costs are the only problem, this could be mitigated by the abolition of the monthly scholarship that the incumbent ATM receives under standard fidic conditions. It should also be noted that the ad hoc ATM is similar to the legal decision adopted shortly before in the UK, so FIDIC was certainly in line with this approach (which later spread widely in Commonwealth jurisdictions). • to appoint one or more experts with the agreement of the parties; Dispute resolution bodies are often found in major construction projects to help parties resolve or prevent disputes and, ideally, to prevent such disputes from escalating into international construction arbitrations.   Dispute settlement bodies are beginning to emerge in other sectors such as the financial and maritime sectors.
A Dispute Board or Dispute Review Board (DRB) or Dispute Adjudication Board (DAB) is a “Job-Site” dispute resolution procedure that generally consists of three independent and impartial persons selected by the parties. The main difference between Dispute Review Boards and most other alternate dispute review techniques (and perhaps the reason why or dispute review boards have been so successful in recent years) is that the Dispute Review Board is appointed at the beginning of a project, before litigation arises and through regular field visits, be actively involved throughout the project (and possibly for an agreed period thereafter).  Since dispute resolution bodies are formulated by a contractual agreement, the parties have considerable flexibility to agree on wording that corresponds to their respective plans. . . .