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.
It is well known that, following the case of Hershel Engineering Limited v Breen Property Limited [2000] EWHC TCC 178, section 108 of the Housing Grants Construction & Regeneration Act 1996 means exactly what it says.
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.
For the first part of this article, please see the July edition of the Newsletter.
Is an adjudicator’s decision issued after the Scottish Scheme’s 28 day time limit enforceable if no extension had been granted before the 28th day?
Time flies as I approach the end of my first year in the chair of the Society. It is a year in which much has happened and the work behind the scenes carried out on behalf of the Society continues via the tireless efforts of dedicated individuals at executive and regional level.
On 19th September the London Region welcomed John Sheils of Shadbolt who gave an excellent talk entitled “The Liability of Adjudicators”. John admitted that, when first asked to talk on this subject, considering the wording of s.108(4) of the HGCRA, he wondered how he was going to fill an hour.
We continue to seek more contributors. Please will you talk with or email Lucy Garrett or Glenn Godfrey if you would like information about contributing or if you would like to see particular topics or themes explored in future editions.
Ever since the decision of the Technology and Construction Court in Picardi v Cuniberti [2003] BLR 487, employers who enjoy “residential occupier” status within the meaning of s.106 Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 have attempted to evade the consequences of an unfavourable c
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.
Section 110(1)(a) in the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act contains the most important obligation in the Act:
“Every construction contract shall provide an adequate mechanism for determining what payments become due and when…” (emphasis added).
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.
It is now 10 years since Parliament enacted the Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (“the Act”) to set up a statutory framework for deciding construction industry disputes using a system of “rough justice”.
I am please to commence this edition of the Society’s newsletter by recording my continued admiration and thanks for the efforts of our editor Lucy Garrett supported by my fellow executive board member Glenn Godfrey in producing a newsletter which continues to improve and is, I am sure members wi
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.
Section 107 of the 1996 Act has the effect that statutory provisions for adjudication apply “… only where the construction contract is in writing …”.
For nearly 8 months I have been receiving regular correspondence from a particular respondent in an adjudication where RICS nominated the adjudicator. From day 1 my correspondent has been simply adamant there was never a contract in writing, and therefore no adjudication could take place.
The question as to when the term Subject to Contract is effective rears its head again, this time in adjudication proceedings.
The Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2004 (SOPA) came into operation on 1st April 2005. It is modeled after the New South Wales legislation of the same name. Essentially, the SOPA comprises two parts.