The full text of articles is available to Adjudication Society members only. If you are a member, please log in if you have not already done so. If you would like to join the Society, click here.
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.
This is my second article reviewing the basics of adjudication.
There is now a new executive committee for the society: Edward Quigg is senior vice-chairman, Tim Willis is junior vice-chairman and Theresa Mohammed has become honorary secretary.
Payment and adjudication in the Australian construction industry is governed by individual State and Territory legislation. Such legislation in Australia commenced on 26th March 2000, in New South Wales.
If there is one theme which runs through the articles which feature in this quarter’s newsletter it is that the world is one surprising place.
A recent complaint I came to hear about concerned the question of whether the adjudicator should have taken a more active role in calling a halt to and/or limiting the number of submissions one party makes.
Much has already been written about the 2012 decision of the Court of Appeal in PC Harrington v Systech.
I was pleased to see that we have a new series for this newsletter called ‘Back to Basics’. This is welcome because, after 14 years of adjudication, complacency has grown. Adjudication is often seen as the only route for dealing with the dispute.
After much debate the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 of Malaysia received Royal Assent on 18 June 2012 . It came into force on the 22 June 2012, and so Malaysia now has a statutory payment and adjudication regime for construction contracts.
With the season of goodwill almost upon us, this double edition of the Adjudication Society’s newsletter provides something of the Past, Present, and Yet to Come reminiscent of Charles Dicken’s A Christmas Carol.
As many of you are aware from previous newsletters or otherwise, the Construction Contracts Bill was dramatically passed by the Irish Seanad (Upper House) in the dying hours of the last parliament.
A criticism sometimes levelled at us in the Adjudication Society is that we can seem to focus on the problems with adjudication rather than on how to use the process.
From time to time complaints arise regarding decisions containing grammatical or factual errors.
Some people believe (incorrectly) that a Black Hole and an Insolvent Company are one and the same thing.
In the November 2011 edition of this newsletter I wrote an article about a panel debate held on the ‘new’ payment provisions by the London and South East Region. One year on, I thought it was worthwhile reviewing how they are faring.
In PC Harrington Contractors Limited v Systech International Limited [2012] EWCA 1371 (Civ) handed down on 23 October 2012, the Court of Appeal confirmed that an Adjudicator is not entitled to be paid his fees where he commits an error of jurisdiction or breach of natural justice, with t
The extent to which an adjudicator can use his own knowledge and experience is of course not a new issue. It has been the subject of numerous cases, most recently a flurry of cases in the Scottish courts.
After much debate the Construction Industry Payment and Adjudication Act 2012 of Malaysia received Royal Assent on 18 June 2012. [Rules of Malaysia, Act 746, Construction Industry Payment And Adjudication Act 2012.
It has turned out to be a bad quarter for the Construction Industry, with the Office of National Statistics blaming the nation’s fall back into recession on a 3% decrease in construction. The construction data was said to have been based on a survey of 8,000 construction companies.
It is well known now that adjudication is a quick process where searching for the perfect result is sacrificed in order to obtain an answer in a short period of time. This is accepted and the fact that adjudicators are allowed to make mistakes is well known.