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.
We are always seeking to develop the Newsletter as a mark of Adjudication excellence; to disseminate leading opinion and best practice for adjudicators and practitioners; to inform about adjudication in the UK and throughout the world.
Several years ago His Honour Judge Anthony Thornton QC, during his keynote address at the Annual Adjudication Society, proposed that there should be a code of conduct for adjudicators. He thought that the Adjudication Society was well placed to develop such a code.
A few books provide a short but concise introduction to the many forms of dispute resolution that now exist in the construction industry1. The Engineer’s Dispute Resolution Handbook, edited by Dr Robert Gaitskell QC, does just that.
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.
In Singapore, adjudication of claims for payment for work and supply of goods and services in the construction industry is facilitated by the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (“SOP Act”) and its accompanying Regulations, both of which came into operation on 1 April 2005.
Here is another case where Multiplex, the constructor of the national stadium at Wembley, is providing assistance to the growing body of case law relevant to adjudication, Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Mott Macdonald Ltd, 10 January 2007, TCC.
Following the continued success of our annual conference I am pleased to announce that Martin Potter together with suitable supporting staff will again organise this year's conference to be held on 15 November 2007.
"In 43 AD four Roman legions led by Claudius invaded Britain and subdued the indigenous Celts.
Construction projects usually have complex supply chains. Payment for materials generally cascades down the supply chain from the developer to the supplier, via the main contractor and subcontractor.
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 Adjudication Society co-hosted with the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators “An Evening with Sir Michael Latham” at the Ulster Reform Club in Belfast on Thursday 30 November.
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.
On 16 November 2006, perhaps by way of a passing shot or maybe simply the final act of the outgoing chairman, Guy Cottam congratulated me in taking over the reins of the Society for the next two years.
It is well established that under the Scheme for Construction Contracts only a single dispute may be referred to adjudication at any one time, unless the parties agree otherwise.
It is easy to lose sight of the fact that many construction disputes have less to do with buildings than with the rights and obligations of those who build them. This is why lawyers who have no construction background still end up specialising in project work.
In Sandhu Menswear Company Limited and Woolworths Plc (5th June 2006, as yet unreported), in the High Court in Birmingham, HHJ Frances Kirkham had to rule as to whether Woolworths were liable to the claimants for the damage caused by a fire. The fire had been caused by third parties.
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.