Articles

PART 1

Introduction

As everyone is by now aware, a contract must comply with the "eight pillars of adjudication" failing which the Scheme for Construction Contracts ("the Scheme")applies.

This is a response by Peter Morton to Chris Dancaster’s recent talk in Bristol:

Hole searching is a popular pastime with lawyers, particularly over the Christmas Season when there is little else to do. Frustration with mothers-in-law and mince pies builds to such an extent that release has to be found.

Although touted as an informal procedure capable of being operated by parties without the need for expensive representation, the reality is that most participants prefer not to represent themselves.

A full-house meeting at Ove Arup's London Offices in mid December heard Delia Dumaresq (Atkin Chambers) and Chris Hough (Fenwick Elliott) give their views on 'multi-party adjudication' and 'getting paid' respectively. A summary of these excellent presentations is given below.

Chris Dancaster speaking on training of adjudicators and adjudicators’ decisions at Laytons’ Bristol office.

Welcome to all members to our first Newsletter 0f 2002.

I am very grateful to this month’s contributors for a wide range of views. We start the Year 2002 with a big bang –a wide range of commentaries on the adjudication process.

Chris Richards kindly responded to my request to pose some real live questions to adjudicators. Do you have any comments ? – should the adjudicator have done something different ?

We are looking for further contributions of this nature.

There is no one answer to many of the questions which I am asked in my professional life. The question which Len has asked me – should adjudicators give reasons for their decisions – is no exception.

The provision of reasons by an adjudicator has a number of disadvantages:

In this our final newsletter of 2001. We again have some excellent contributions from colleagues round the UK and we run our first effort at addressing practical issues. We have excellent articles from Chris Dancaster and John Rushton on Adjudicators Decisions.

Chris Dancaster FRICS DipICArb FCIArb tackles the complex area of Adjudicators Decision Writing :

LB What is the most important thing in your view about the Decision?

The recent proposals from the DTI to amend the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act contain an amendment to outlaw the practice (affirmed by the Bridgeway v Tolent case) whereby one party inserted into the contract arrangements a clause making the party which referred a dispute to ad

First may I thank many members for their kind comments about the recent Newsletters………”stimulating, pithy, interesting, filled a need in the market to have forum for exchange of views” – are just a few recent remarks from our members..

This month I am pleased to present to you two opposing views – Janey Milligan discuss the ‘Adjudicators Perspective’ and Alan MacAleer gives his views on adjudication as a technical adviser to the parties. Ladies first, so I will start with Janey :

I note with interest the recent contributions regarding adjudicator's fees and conditions.

I decided to give my Interview Spot a rest this month and instead have put together a Comments Section.

I decided to give my Interview Spot a rest this month and instead have put together a Comments Section.

This month’s guest on the spot is Scottish Solicitor, Lindy Patterson, Head of the Construction Unit in Macroberts, Solicitors. Lindy has been heavily involved in construction disputes and her firm has acted for adjudicators and for parties in many adjudications.