An alternative regulatory regime for contract variations to public-private partnership contracts effected after the conduct of a competitive bidding process

Clicks: 1
ID: 286401
2020
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #3,081 of 3,757 articles by views in Malay Journal

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 3,757 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
This study examines the current approach to contract variations under the Revised Build-Operate-Transfer Law and how the same impacts on the public policy considerations behind the conduct of a competitive bidding process. The researchers then attempt to address the legal dilemma by providing an alternative regulatory regime which aims to protect public policy and balance the interests of all stakeholders. Key informant interviews were conducted given the highly technical requirements of the research and a survey of cases decided by the Supreme Court on the topic was conducted for the formulation of an alternative regulatory approach to contract variations. Our analysis showed that there is a permissive approach to contract variations under current laws primarily due to lack of clear guidelines on the materiality test necessary to gauge the validity of proposed changes to the original contract. Therefore, the researchers recommend a two-pronged alternative regulatory approach to contract variations. First, it establishes a general presumption of impermissibility which the implementing body can then rebut by pointing to a justification based on considerations collated from cases decided by the Supreme Court. The factors which may be taken into consideration varies and cannot be predetermined because they depend on the particular circumstances of each case.
Reference Key
persistent_1760658464_68f18420342b6 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Mendoza, Yralli C.
Journal Malay Journal
Year 2020
DOI
DOI not found
URL
https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etdm_law/11
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.