Open Access
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 347, 2022
2nd International Conference on Civil and Environmental Engineering (ICCEE 2022)
Article Number 05011
Number of page(s) 9
Section Disaster and Construction Management
Published online 14 April 2022
  1. A. Youssef, H. Osman, M. Georgy, N. Yehia, J. Leg. Aff. Disput. Resolut. Eng. Constr., 10, 2, p. 04518002 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  2. M.A. U. Abdul-Malak, H. F. Hanano, H. M. Turman, J. Leg. Aff. Disput. Resolut. Eng. Constr., 11, 4, p. 05019003 (2019) [Google Scholar]
  3. H. A. Haloush, J. Leg. Aff. Disput. Resolut. Eng. Constr., 13, 1, p. 04520041 (2021) [Google Scholar]
  4. A. Talukhaba, M. Mapatha, CIB World Build. Congr., pp. 768–780 (2007) [Google Scholar]
  5. CIDB, “Model Terms of Construction Contract,” (2007) [Google Scholar]
  6. A. Supardi, Sub-Contractors ’ Readiness on the Malaysian Security of Payment Legislation in Construction Industry, in International Conference on Construction and Project Management, pp. 248–252 (2010) [Google Scholar]
  7. Arcadis, 2021 Global Construction Disputes Report, (2021) [Google Scholar]
  8. R. Zaghloul, F. Hartman, Int. J. Proj. Manag., 21, 6, pp. 419–424 (2003) [Google Scholar]
  9. N. M. Rosli, The Use of Standard Form of Domestic Subcontract in Malaysian Construction Industry, (2007) [Google Scholar]
  10. S. Huda, S. Mohd, Z. Ismail, Infrastruct. Univ. Kuala Lumpur Res. J., 3, 1, pp. 20–28 (2015) [Google Scholar]
  11. N. B. Siraj, A. R. Fayek, J. Constr. Eng. Manag., 145, 9, p. 03119004 (2019) [Google Scholar]
  12. H. Y. Chong and R. M. Zin, Construction Contract Administration-an approach on clarity, J. Int. Assoc. Promot. Plain Leg. Lang., 60, pp. 6–10 (2008) [Google Scholar]
  13. R. U. Farooqui, M. Umer, S. Azhar, Key causes of disputes in the Pakistani construction industry-Assessment of trends from the viewpoint of contractors, 50th ASC Annual International Conference Proceedings, pp. 26–28 (2014) [Google Scholar]
  14. S. N. Ting, Construction Procurement Framework Incorporating Form Enhancement Modules for the Selection of Standard Form of Contract in Malaysia, p. 757 (2013) [Google Scholar]
  15. J. M. K. Hamie, M.-A. U. Abdul-Malak, J. Leg. Aff. Disput. Resolut. Eng. Constr., 10, 3, p. 04518011 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  16. R. Paciaroni, The Voice, pp. 39–40 (2013) [Google Scholar]
  17. R. Rameezdeen, C. Rajapakse, Constr. Manag. Econ., 25,7, pp. 729–737 (2007) [Google Scholar]
  18. N. B. Siraj, A. R. Fayek, J. Constr. Eng. Manag., 145, 9, p. 03119004 (2019) [Google Scholar]
  19. N. A. N. A. Ali, “Modernising Construction Contracts Drafting – A Plea for Good Sense,” in W102 - Special Track 18th CIB World Building Congress, vol. W113, no. May, pp. 323–345 (2010) [Google Scholar]
  20. A. Manderson, M. Jefferies, G. Brewer, Constr. Econ. Build., 15, 3, pp. 72–84 (2015) [Google Scholar]
  21. T. E. Uher, Risks in subcontracting: Subcontract conditions, Constr. Manag. Econ., 9, 1985, pp. 495–508 (1991) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. M. A. Mohd Fateh, H. Zakariah, S. Ema Ezanee, Improvement for significant clauses in the standard form of contract for industrialized building system construction, IOP Conference Series: Material Science Engineering, 713, 1 (2020) [Google Scholar]
  23. S. Bandi, Framework Development of Bills of Quantities, (2015) [Google Scholar]
  24. F. Ajma, Factors Influencing Electronic Commerce Adoption in Malaysian Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (Smes) Fatima Ajmal Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, (2017) [Google Scholar]
  25. S. Raj, J. Hillig, W. Hughes, Int. J. Law Built Environ., 1, 3, pp. 205–220 (2009) [Google Scholar]
  26. I. El-adaway, S. Fawzy, M. Ahmed, R. White, J. Leg. Aff. Disput. Resolut. Eng. Constr., 8, 2, p. 04516001 (2016) [Google Scholar]
  27. I. H. El-adaway, R. A. Vance, I. S. Abotaleb, J. Leg. Aff. Disput. Resolut. Eng. Constr., 12, 1, p. 04519031 (2020) [Google Scholar]
  28. C. L. Menches, L. Dorn, J. Leg. Aff. Disput. Resolut. Eng. Constr., 5,2, pp. 97–105 (2013) [Google Scholar]
  29. S. O. Cheung, K. T. Yiu, P. S. Chim, 132. pp. 48–56 (2006) [Google Scholar]
  30. N. S. Mansor, K. A. Rashid, Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci., 222, pp. 93–102 (2016) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  31. A. Saseendran, B. F. Bigelow, Z. K. Rybkowski, D. E. Jourdan, J. Leg. Aff. Disput. Resolut. Eng. Constr.,12, 2, p. 04520008 (2020) [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.