Court judgments from adjudication cases are numerous, though not always significant in directing the practice of the process of adjudication or the practices of adjudicators.
Articles
Articles by Mark Entwistle
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14Adjudicators may generally be said to pursue twin objectives; one inward-looking and subjective and the other outward-looking and objective; though both are related, and are essential to achieving an acceptable result of the adjudication process.
It is not often that the subject of penalty clauses rears its head in higher courts; the law has appeared pretty settled on the subject for years, if not decades. It is interesting then, that not one but two recent cases have been the subject of appeals (heard together) in the Supreme Court on this very subject: [2015] UKSC 67.
Adjudication under the Construction Acts(s) in the UK is approaching its 20th anniversary and it can be anticipated, in celebration of that august event, that many reflections upon its efficacy will soon be put into print.
The resolution of disputes in both the domestic and international arenas has, over the years, relied heavily upon non-court processes, increasingly in recent times. The costs incurred by the parties involved in dispute resolution can be considerable, with relationships between them also being put at risk. The focus has, however, increasingly switched in more recent years from binding resolution by tribunal decision imposed upon parties, to a more co-operative and non-confrontational approach.
The process of obtaining the services of an adjudicator has, from the very start of statutory adjudication in the UK, been a rather fraught affair.
Over recent years, much has been written, and even more said, about the quality of performance and abilities of adjudicators.
INTRODUCTION
In the middle of November 2009, the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 (“the Act”) was passed into law. Though it is not yet clear when it will come into operation, it includes several provisions that will impact upon both adjudication and payment arrangements in the UK construction industry.
It is trite to state that the identification of the issues is a crucial activity in any adjudication.
It would not be an exaggeration to say that the Scheme for Construction Contracts (Regulations) 1998 are by far the most commonly used set of rules applying to adjudications. Use of the Scheme has become, if anything, more commonplace over the years, with many standard forms of contract specifying it as the applicable set of rules. Thus, they represent not just the default procedure (under section 108(5) of the Construction Act), but also, increasingly, the rules of choice.
Introduction
The practice of managing adjudication can be succinctly summarised as involving two key elements – procedural management and the managing the evidence.
It is not uncommon to hear negative comments from parties or their representatives based upon their experiences of adjudication. Some of the most common of such views relate to the cost of the process.