An Assessment of the Legal Framework for Dispute Resolution in Construction Contracts in Abuja, FCT

Construction contracts in Nigeria frequently give rise to disputes over payment, variation orders, delay, and defects that impose significant costs on all parties in the built environment sector. This study assesses the dispute resolution frameworks embedded in standard Nigerian construction contracts, including the Joint Contract Tribunal Nigeria Form, NEC contracts used by federal agencies, and bespoke contracts used in Abuja Federal Capital Territory projects. A mixed-methods approach combining doctrinal analysis with interviews of 20 construction lawyers, project managers, and arbitrators in Abuja was adopted, supplemented by analysis of 15 construction arbitration awards from the Lagos Court of Arbitration and the Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration. Results indicate that adjudication as a rapid interim dispute resolution mechanism is absent from standard Nigerian construction contracts despite its widespread adoption in the United Kingdom and South Africa. Arbitration clauses frequently fail to specify seat, language, and institutional rules, leading to procedural disputes before substantive matters can be determined. Litigation remains the default for government contracts, increasing costs and project delays. The study concludes that Nigeria's construction dispute resolution landscape requires mandatory contractual adjudication for all construction contracts above a defined value threshold, a standard form government construction contract incorporating best-practice dispute avoidance boards, and mandatory arbitration training for engineers and contractors.

Keywords: construction contracts, dispute resolution, arbitration, adjudication, Abuja FCT