Partneringaftaler og traditionelle entreprisekontrakter

Union Jack

Partneringaftaler og traditionelle entreprisekontrakter

Show simple item record Thomasen, Jesper 2012-12-12 2012-12-12T09:33:49Z 2012-12-12T09:33:49Z 2012-12-12
dc.description.abstract In Denmark, two forms of contracts are used in the business of construction. The traditional construction contracts are made on the ground of AB 92. These terms are a set of standard terms that are used in Danish construction. These types of contracts are developed in corporation with participation of both builder and contractor so that the terms are developed in a fair manner to both parties. The other way to form construction contracts in construction is called partnering. Partnering is a form of strategic alliance, which can be used in most businesses. However, in Denmark partnering is mostly used in construction and has been used in the past 10-15 years. Partnering is grounded on concepts such as mutual respect, corporation and trust. In the literature supporting partnering, the traditional construction agreements are often described as outdated. For example, partnering agreements are often described as an agreement with fewer conflicts and more efficient corporation than the traditional agreements. This results in a more optimal outcome in favor to the partnering parties. The goal of this thesis is to study these hypotheses by describing the differences between the two types of contracts and investigate which contract or which part of which contract is most efficient. In order to reach my goal, I will examine and analyze literature, legislation and reports that support either the traditional construction agreements or partnering agreements. My results show that the two types of contracts are shy of differences and the differences that occur mostly fall out to the advantage of the partnering agreement. The parties of the partnering agreement are bound to a high level of loyalty and focus at all times on constructive corporation, which may result in a more efficient outcome statistically. Nevertheless, this is extremely difficult to demonstrate as each construction can be very different. The conclusion is that Parties that wish to use a partnering agreement are not guaranteed a more successful construction but may have more success due to the high level of loyalty and corporation. en_US
dc.format.extent 71 s. en_US
dc.language dan en_US
dc.subject.other Kandidatafhandlinger en_US
dc.title Partneringaftaler og traditionelle entreprisekontrakter en_US
dc.type mop en_US
dc.accessionstatus modt12dec12 jobrmo en_US
dc.contributor.corporation Copenhagen Business School. CBS en_US
dc.contributor.corporationshort Law Department. LAW en_US
dc.contributor.corporationshort Juridisk Institut. JUR en_US
dc.contributor.department MSc in Business Administration and Commercial Law en_US
dc.contributor.departmentshort 32 en_US
dc.description.notes Cand.merc.(jur.). Erhvervsøkonomi og erhvervsjura en_US
dc.publisher.year 2012 en_US Frederiksberg en_US
dc.title.subtitle En undersøgelse af forskelle og ligheder på to kontrakttyper en_US

Files Size Format View
jesper_thomasen.pdf 801.3Kb PDF View/Open

The following license files are associated with this item:

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record