The themes of this August Newsletter are contracts in writing and the DTI Review which as you will all know was published on 20 June 2007. Adrian Williamson QC has provided an authoritative overview of the latest contract in writing authorities, Martin Burns provides the point of view of the appointing body and Ben Beaumont deals specifi cally with Bennett Electrical.
Lucy Garrett
Welcome to this bumper edition of the Newsletter. Matt Molloy, who will be well known to many readers, has produced a fascinating article giving a series of invaluable tips to all those involved in adjudications. We also have two reports from Singapore, which of course instituted its own statutory adjudication procedure in 2005 and is undergoing a similar first few years as our Housing Grants, Regeneration and Construction Act 1996. Professor Philip Chan, Naresh Mahtani and Elizabeth Xue explore in detail the procedure and the use of evidence under the Singapore Act.
This is a bumper edition of the Newsletter.
Nerys Jefford gives us an insight (she was instructed on behalf of CAMBBA) into the M6 tiger tails adjudication which came before Mr Justice Jackson on enforcement. We have two interesting articles from Ben Beaumont (who is becoming a regular contributor) and Jules Harbage. The Case Notes are also particularly comprehensive this edition.
Firstly, I must apologise to the members for the lateness of this edition of the Newsletter. This is the consequence of a simultaneous and profound work crisis experienced by all members of the team, but especially me. At least the timing of this edition allows me to wish you all a very merry Christmas and happy New Year.
As you will see below from Bob’s maiden article, there have been some changes at the top following the Fifth Annual Conference a couple of weeks ago. I would also like to thank Guy for his contributions to the Newsletter since I have been editing.
Many thanks to those of you who have been sending in your questions about various issues arising in adjudication to our panel of experts. The email address (which is also on the website) is qanda@ adjudication.org. We are unable to publish the queries this time for reasons of space, but hope to include several in the next edition of the Newsletter. We will welcome your views on the problems discussed and may institute a letters page if they are controversial enough!
In this occasional column, we look at legal issues which are frequently raised by parties to adjudication (and indeed arbitration) and which are not necessarily fully understood. This time the subject is impossibility.
This Newsletter comes to you just before the August break – perhaps some of you are just leaving on holiday to, say, the Sahara Desert – it would at least be cooler than London.
I must open this edition of the Newsletter with an apology to JR Hartley – although I tried very hard to include his article on complaints against adjudicators in the last edition, I managed to fail. Quite plainly this Newsletter (or at the very least its Editor) is not up to the standard of the Yellow Pages.
This edition of the Newsletter is, I think, particularly interesting. The theme might be said to be “complaints.”
My first task is to apologise for the lateness of this Newsletter which is directly attributable to my involvement in one of the Wembley trials. The delay in the issue of this Edition is just one of the many consequences of that lively project. My second task is to echo Glenn’s apology to Janey Milligan below: we do make every effort to ensure that your contributions are accurately published but occasionally errors do slip through.