Is the prompt payment act at odds with public policy? In both general litigation and construction litigation, courts generally give parties great freedom to contract. Thus, New York’s policy is to enforce arbitration agreements in construction contracts.[i] Conversely, New York courts do not usually force parties into arbitration unless their contract expressly requires it.[ii]
Perhaps the most common construction-related dispute is the refusal of a party to make payment to its contractors or subcontractors. While litigation is the traditional avenue for resolving such disputes, methods of alternative dispute resolution such as arbitration and mediation are enjoying growing importance in the field of construction law.
The Supreme Court, New York County, recently clarified the impact of contractual language specifying litigation as the forum for resolution in the subcontract, and impact of New York’s Prompt Payment, providing for arbitration of disputes where it applies.
General Business Law Section 756 (and the sections that follow it), commonly known as the Prompt Payment Act, establish requirements for how soon a construction contractor or subcontractor must be paid and allow expedited arbitration in the event that prompt payment is not made for qualifying projects.
Get an Experienced Construction Litigation and Arbitration Firm Fighting for You!
The Law Offices of John Caravella, P.C. offers a free initial consultation with a Long Island construction attorney to discuss your legal concerns with no obligation. To schedule an appointment, call our office today or fill out the form below.
This is Attorney Advertising. This web site is designed for general information only. The information presented in this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.