A manufacturer and a critical component supplier disagree about repeated engineering changes made after contract award. The supplier argues that the changes fall outside the original statement of work and require compensation. The buyer argues that the changes are normal refinements within the agreed design process. The relationship is important, the dispute is technically complex, and both firms want a business-level resolution before legal positions harden. Which mechanism is most appropriate to resolve this dispute?

Question

Answer

Mediation, because a third party can decide the technical interpretation and impose a compromise on both firms.

Answer

Minitrial, because managers can present the technical and commercial facts before executives negotiate a resolution.

Answer

Rent-a-judge, because a private trial gives the parties a decision while preserving normal appeal procedures.

Answer

Litigation, because a court ruling would create the strongest formal position on the disputed design obligations.

Crowdly

A manufacturer and a critical component supplier disagree about repeated enginee...

Want instant access to all verified answers on cems.myexams.unisa.ac.za?