Forensic Engineering

bd

The Research Development Center of Construction Law (CLC), Forensic Engineering Committee Chairman, Dr. Li JianZhong (former Chairman of Taiwan Shi Xi Co., Ltd., former Vice Chairman of the Public Works Executive Committee, former Dean of Civil engineering School of National Central University), Legal Advisory Committee Chairman Dr HuangLi (former Dean of Law School, National ChengChi University) and Centre Director Dr. Fan SuLing (Faculty of Civil Engineering, Tamkang University) provide professional legal advice to courts, arbitration associations, conciliation commissions, technical appraisals or agencies entrusted by the engineering industry.

I. Construction Technology Accreditation

Accepting courts or government orders and provide profession opinion entrusted from clients. Including: Controversy on project’s agreement (Extension in construction period, confirmations of price, geological variations etc.), analysis and distribution of responsibility on engineering disaster, analysis on liability on adjacent property damage, analysis on disaster for insurance claim etc.

II. Expert’s Opinion

Accepting entrustment from government or non-governmental to provide expert’s opinion. Including: Controversy on project’s agreement (Extension in construction period, confirmations of price, geological variations etc.), analysis and distribution of responsibility on engineering disaster, analysis of liability on adjacent property damage, analysis of disaster for insurance claim etc.

III. Consulting Services

Accepting cases related to engineering disputes between both sides and other interested parties, providing advice and consultancy on engineering disputes.

I.Procedure Review

To determine the acceptance of the case and evaluation of the fees. Prejudging team will be formed according to the type of case and notify the client to make payment in one week through email notification. Client will be urged to make payment. The entrustment from courts or clients will be rejected if payment does not received from client.

II.Substantive Review

Prejudging team is responsible to read through the case. In case prejudging team found that they have to clarify the fact, they must inform the clients and ask them to prepare evidences or call for a meeting. Formation of prejudging team is based on technical accreditation mechanism. After the initial report is done, it will be reviewed in committee meeting.
Review meeting classifies into project committee meeting and committee meeting. Type of meeting is decided depend on number of field related while the rest is according to technology accreditation mechanism.

III.Committee Meeting (Project Committee Meeting)

After committee reach a consensus that the accreditation result is correct, our centre will send our expert’s opinion to the courts or clients, in the name of Tamkang University Construction Law Research and Development Centre.

I. Construction Technology Accreditation’s Mining Committee System

Various engineering field recruit committee members who are expert, with high reputation and experienced to form the committee. No tenure system on committee members. Committee can recruit members who reach the requirement at any time. However, whoever injustice and do not comply with professional ethics will be driven out from the committee.

II.A prejudging team must be formed to handle all jobs or cases accepted by accreditation committee.

Prejudging are subjected to review procedure before making the final conclusion.

III. Prejudging Procedure

Committees of prejudging team of construction law consultancy and cases of accreditation are selected by director. Director will assign committees who have professional skills on the related field.
Committee members of prejudging team of construction technology accreditation is different and it is depend on type of the case.

  1. Basic type: Cases which only relate to only one field and with simple legal relationship. Prejudging team: The post will be run by professional assigned by the director of the construction technology accreditation committee.
  2. Compound type: Involve more than two professional field. Prejudging team: The post will be run by professional assigned by the director of the construction technology accreditation committee and expert from the related field must be invited.
  3. Integrate type: Cases which relate to interface between more than two professional field-construction and the legal relationship is complicated. Prejudging team: The post will be run by professional assigned by the director of the construction technology accreditation committee and committee must at least have knowledge on project management and committee with knowledge of law might be included if it is needed.
  4. Combine type: Cases which related to large scale construction and development project, MRT project, engineering dispute cases that cross border and cross stage. Prejudging team: The post will be run by professional assigned by the director of the construction technology accreditation committee or expect who have knowledge on project management and law.

Review team will make decision based on voices from prejudging team if any controversial happened between prejudging team.

IV. Review Procedure

Project committee handle the review work. Project committee is made up of director, director of construction accreditation committee, director of law consultancy committee and committee from other related field.
Committee must attend project committee’s meeting and it is non representative.
Project committee’s meeting practise principle of consensus. Principally, ½ out of all committee must attend the meeting and it require agreement from 2/3 of the committee.

I. Operating Principle

  1. Justice in appraisal: All committee from prejudging and review team must follow article 303 and article 32, which is voluntarily disqualify himself/herself in circumstances as mentioned in paragraph 1 to 5 of code of civil procedure.
  2. Objectivity principle in appraisal: Do not publish name list of prejudging team. Members of prejudging team and the expert are not allowed to contact with client privately.
  3. Principle of specialization: deliberation of opinion between members and senior members of committee must be done for the work in same field. If the members do not specialise in that particular field, they must recruit experienced expert to handle the case.
  4. Confidentiality principle: The report only can be provided to client. During the process, committees and whoever participate the investigation are not allowed to provide materials and opinions to other. No reference material and evidence of the accreditation can be taken out and everything must be returned to clients within one week after the accreditation has been done.

II.Prejudging Procedure

  1. Litigants and litigious participant should take an active approach to provide evidences which is beneficial to themselves
  2. Field survey will be conducted when it is needed. When the survey is done, client will be together.
  3. Cases are examined through written review. When necessary, meeting or audio and video conference is called to present the opinion after get agreement from client.
  4. Client is contacted and asked to provide evidences at once time when the evidence is insufficient. If the evidences needed are not provided after 6 months, the accreditation will be ended and the fees will be refunded after deducting 20% of the operating cost.
  5. Sampling, experimenting, drilling, measuring etc. during accreditation process should be entrusted helps from other agent. Our centre will contact suitable organisation to carry out the process. The process will be carried out under supervision of our centre and authorised organization. The cost is afforded by client.
  6. Before validating the report, both parties involved in the controversy and interested parties should be given chances to present or reinforce the evidence.

III.Review Procedure

  1. Director calls for committee meeting to handle review work. Director will authorise a committee to represent him/her when he/she is not able to attend the meeting.
  2. Related organisation or expert is invited when needed after committee meeting evaluate the case.
  3. Appraisal opinion is rejected and prejudging team will amend it if the opinion cannot get 2/3 agreement from the committee who attend the meeting
  4. Committee or senior committee who is assigned to attend to court to explain the appraisal opinion should attend the committee meeting; committee and expert that involve in the work should sit in meeting to explain the accreditation procedure.

IV. Appraisal Report

  1. Principally, accreditation cases those accepted by our centre will be dealt within 3 months. Processing period can be extended after it is approved by director when it is necessary. The processing period is stopped if it has to wait for certificate or other entrusted agent to drilling, testing and measuring.
  2. According to article 340 in code of civil procedure, the designated officer of our centre will attend to court to explain the appraisal opinion.
  3. Litigants or other interested parties have to request for clarification if there is any queries on the appraisal opinion. Fees will be charged if item other than original entrustment is asked for evaluation.

Director

Dr. Chien-Chung John Li
(Former Director of CECI Engineering Consultants, Inc., Former Associate Director of Public Construction Commission, Former Dean of School of Engineering, National Central University)

Committee

Director of committee recommend or select committee depend on professional skills required on the particular accreditation.

I.Construction Technology Accreditation

1.Basic type: Cases which only relate to only one field and with simple legal relationship. Charges: from 300 thousand yuan
2.Compound type: Cases which relate to more than two professional field. Charges: From 600 thousand yuan.
3.Integrate type: Cases which relate to more than two professional field-construction interface and legal relationship are complicated. Charges: From 1 million yuan.
4.Combine type: Cases which relate to large scale construction and development project, MRT project, engineering dispute cases that cross border and cross stage. Charges: From 2 million.
Detailed cot depend on disputed amount, necessity of field survey, evidence is complete or not, number of interested parties involved, amount of work on analysis and actuarial, amount if dispute point etc.

II. Profession Opinion

Same as construction technology accreditation.

III. Consultancy

Depend on professional needs to select the consultant. Fees rate is depend on qualifications. Charges: From 6000 yuan per hour.

Tamkang University Construction Law Research and Development Centre (Project Management and Construction Technology Accreditation)

No. 5, Lane 199, Jinhua Street, Da’an District, Taipei City, Taiwan 100
*National Judicial Yuan’s accreditation agent

Construction Technology Accreditation Committee Director:
Formal Director of CECI Engineering Consultants, Inc.
Former Associate Director of Public Construction Commission
Formal Dean of Engineering of National Central University
Dr. Chien-Chung John Li

Construction Law Consultancy Committee Director:
Dean of School of Law of National Chengchi University, Dr. Hwang Li
Director:
Associate Professor of Tamkang University, Dr. Fan SuLing

Services:

I. Construction Technology Accreditation, Profession Opinion and Consultancy
II. Project Management, Construction Law and Building Information Modelling (BIM) Entrustment
III.Promotion of Courses and Education Training

Welcome to our webpagefan page and organization
Line ID : itsme2018