This Report has the potential to alert the adjudication community to perceived problems so it can respond to change and ensure that the current success of the process is built upon, and the process responds to wider societal changes.
Articles
Articles by Tim Willis
Displaying 1 - 20 of 21Whether an adjudicator correctly identifies an issue as something which he or she has jurisdiction to decide is potentially determinative of whether the decision is enforceable.
Many people in the construction industry do not have to consider how you get an adjudicator unless they are drafting the contract or a dispute arises. An adjudicator or possible adjudicators can be named in the contract or agreed by the parties once the dispute has arisen. Alternatively they can be selected by a nominating body.
The construction industry has become used to the mantra repeated in a number of cases, that the intention behind the Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 as amended (“the Construction Act”) is to give effect to a “pay now, argue later” regime.
This is the third article in the series concerning the implications for adjudication of the introduction if BIM into projects.
In considering the relationship between BIM and the standard contract documents we come up against a number of issues. First, what status should we attribute to our BIM protocols and procedures? Secondly, what status should be attributed to the information produced by those procedures? and Thirdly, what should we say about the resolution of inconsistencies and ambiguities within the information produced for BIM or between that information and other information or procedures?
This is the first of a series of articles in which I will explore the challenges that will arise from the implementation of Building Information Modelling (“BIM”) for those involved in dispute resolution.
The legislative sub-committee met on 27th January 2009 to discuss the amendments to the Construction Act contained within the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill.
The proposals contained in the Bill with regard to adjudication are very much in line
The Midlands Region’s most recent event was a talk by Abdul-Lateef Jinadu of Keating Chambers on the pitfalls the adjudicator should avoid. The joint event with the CIArb was well attended despite the hot weather.
The Construction Industry Consultation “improving payment practice in the Construction Industry” was published on 20th June 2007. The deadline for responses is 17th September 2007.
In Melville Dundas Ltd (in Receivership) and Others v George Wimpey UK Ltd (Scotland) [2007] UKHL 18, the House of Lords dealt with the question of whether JCT provisions for payment following a determination on grounds of insolvency were contrary to Section 110 and 111 of the HGCRA 1996.
Our two most recent events took place in October and were well attended.
17 October – Paper by Delia Dumaresq
Are recent Court of Appeal Decisions indicative of a sea change on enforcement or re-statements of established principles?
The Midlands Region held an evening talk on 23 June in which the question of the desirability and purpose of a Code of Conduct for adjudicators was debated.
Tony Bingham spoke to an audience of 35 on the Blue Standard Approach to Adjudication. The event held at the Birmingham Chamber Commerce and Industry on 28 July attracted a mixture of existing members and new members and provided a forum for debating the role of the adjudicator.
Almost all of the cases concerning adjudication that you read about in these pages concern challenges to the adjudicator’s jurisdiction, which are raised as a defence to an application to the Court to enforce the adjudicator’s decision.