Blog

The independent expert opinion in alternative dispute resolution (MASC / ADR)

In many technical disputes —especially in the fields of architecture, construction, and real estate— disagreement does not arise so much from bad faith between the parties as from differing interpretations of the facts. Is there really a construction defect? Was the work carried out in accordance with the project? Is it a matter of maintenance, use, or design? In this context, the independent expert opinion has become a key tool within alternative dispute resolution methods (MASC / ADR).

 

An expert opinion does not replace mediation, negotiation, or arbitration, but it can play a decisive role in unlocking entrenched situations, reducing uncertainty, and facilitating informed agreements, often avoiding the need to take the conflict to court.

 

What is an independent expert opinion

An independent expert opinion consists of a technical analysis carried out by a qualified, impartial professional who is not involved in the dispute, providing a reasoned assessment of a specific issue under disagreement. Unlike court-appointed expert evidence, it does not arise from contentious proceedings nor is it intended as direct evidence before a court, but rather serves an advisory and clarifying purpose.

 

Its value lies in offering an objective technical perspective, understandable to all parties and focused on verifiable facts, distancing itself from defensive or strategic positions typical of litigation.

 

In the construction sector, such an opinion may address building pathologies, regulatory compliance, conformity with the project, assessment of interventions, probable causes of damage, or the reasonable scope of repair works.

 

Role within MASC / ADR

Recent legislation and practice in the field of MASC acknowledge that not all conflicts necessarily require a judge, but almost all require clarity. The independent expert opinion occupies precisely this middle ground: it does not impose a solution, but helps to build one.

 

It can be used as preliminary support before mediation, during negotiations between parties, or even as a technical basis for an out-of-court settlement. In many cases, it helps correct mistaken perceptions, adjust expectations, and focus dialogue on realistic solutions.

 

When the parties share a common, neutral technical reference, the conflict shifts away from “who is right” towards “what can be done” and “how it can be resolved”.

 

Differences from court expert evidence

Although both figures share a technical foundation, their logic differs. A court expert operates within contentious proceedings, subject to strict procedural rules and with an evidentiary purpose. An independent expert opinion, by contrast, functions within a more flexible, preventive, and collaborative framework.

 

It does not seek to reinforce one party’s position against another, but to provide a balanced technical view that can be accepted —or at least understood— by all. This difference in approach is key to its effectiveness in ADR contexts.

 

The architect’s role as an independent expert

Thanks to their cross-disciplinary training and understanding of the building process, architects are particularly well placed to act as independent experts in technical disputes. They do not only analyse projects and construction works, but also understand the interaction between regulations, execution, use, maintenance, and the expectations of the various stakeholders involved.

 

When combined with specific training in mediation and alternative dispute resolution, their intervention can go beyond technical diagnosis, helping to translate it into clear and useful language for dialogue between the parties.

 

A preventive and strategic tool

Introducing an independent expert opinion at early stages of a conflict can prevent unnecessary escalation, reduce economic and emotional costs, and preserve professional or neighbourhood relationships that might otherwise be seriously damaged.

 

In a context where justice systems increasingly promote MASC as a preferred route, the independent expert opinion stands out as a strategic choice, particularly in disputes where the root of the disagreement is technical rather than legal.

 

Resolving a conflict does not always require winning a lawsuit. Sometimes, it is enough to fully understand the problem. And for that, having an expert, independent, and rigorous perspective can make all the difference.