Examines the system of settling construction disputes with reference to "Checkpoint Ltd v Strathclyde Pension Fund" ([2003] EWCA Civ 84, Abs...). Explains that England has an adversarial system for deciding disputes that has the parties challenging and testing the other party. Argues that it is a problem if the adjudicator is such an expert in what they already know that they are not flexible enough in their views. In the Checkpoint case, the CA said the question was whether the arbitrator was supplying evidence or adjudicating upon it. It was found that the arbitrator did not stray outside the issues joined between the parties as he used his own knowledge gained from his experience but only about the issues argued by A and B. The Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 indicate that the adjudicator may take the initiative in ascertaining the facts and the law but only necessary to determine the dispute.