Proposed Legislative Changes
This workshop was chaired by Nicholas Gould (Associate, Fenwick Elliott). The four panel members, comprised Jonathan Brooks (Partner, Osborne Clarke), Neil Kelly (Partner, MacRoberts), Martin Burns (Manager RICS Dispute Resolution Service) and Professor Phillip Capper (Partner, Lovells).
Many thought that the proposed legislative changes were merely the three changes set out in the draft statutory instrument setting out 3 amendments to the Scheme. First, the statement 3 that the Adjudicator should not take into account legal or other costs of the parties arising out of or in connection with the adjudication. Second, the right for the adjudicator to set a deadline by which the parties must request reasons. Finally, a residual power for the adjudicator in respect of clerical mistakes or errors.
However, the debate in respect of proposed legislative changes is much wider than the simple proposals set out in the draft statutory instrument. The panel considered the legislative schemes adopted in New Zealand and Australia, as well as the potential for a range of other legislative changes.
A short synopsis of each of three papers appears below. First, Neil Kelly considers a range of issues that have arisen in respect of adjudication, which could be resolved quite legislative change. Next, Jonathan Brooks considers some suggestions for change for adjudication by comparison to adjudication systems which have been adopted in foreign jurisdictions. Finally, Martin Burns considers those legislative changes and argues that the RICS does not support substantial changes to the Scheme or the Act.