Seanad debates

Wednesday, 10 March 2010

Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage

 

4:00 pm

Photo of Ivana BacikIvana Bacik (Independent)

I need to look at this issue in greater detail. It is a concern that was raised with me by the architects institute. I agree with the Minister that the objective should be to move to some type of alternative dispute mechanism rather than going to court. That objective is entirely positive and I agree that mediation conferences are infinitely preferable. The chair of the mediation conference should not necessarily be a lawyer. I am glad to see it can be another person nominated by a body prescribed. There is a provision in subsection (4)() for a ministerial order to specify what sort of other person could be chair of a mediation conference. I will have a look at it again and see what precisely are the concerns of the architects institute. I wanted to flag at this stage that they had some concern that this might not be an appropriately tailored process to deal with disputes where there was some technical issue to be resolved. There may be enough flexibility in the current wording to provide for that but I will examine it and see whether there is some improvement that could be made.

Section 21, as amended, agreed to.

SECTION 22.

Question proposed: "That section 22 stand part of the Bill."

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.