Freeing the adjudication genie from its 28-day decision bottle
Franklin, K.
Freeing the adjudication genie from its 28-day decision bottle - 2005 - Architects' Journal 221(1) 13 January 2005, 39(1) .
Considers the consequences for adjudicators brought about by a cluster of cases decided by the Technology and Construction Court. The Judge in particular questioned whether it was possible for an adjudicator to come to a conclusion to a case within a 28-day process. For example, in "AWG Construction Services Ltd v Rockingham Motor Speedway Ltd" ([2004] EWHC 88 (TCC), [2004] TCLR 6) the adjudication process was rendered unenforceable by AWG not having a proper opportunity to consider new material produced. Judge Toulmin found that the test for deciding whether a dispute was suitable for adjudication was not if it was too complex but whether an adjudicator could reach a fair decision within the time agreed between the parties.
MANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION-ADJUDICATION
MANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION-ADJUDICATION-ADJUDICATORS
AWG CONSTRUCTION LTD V ROCKINGHAM MOTOR SPEEDWAY LTD
BREACHES OF NATURAL JUSTICE
CIB PROPERTIES LTD V BIRSE CONSTRUCTION LTD
MCALPINE PPS PIPELINE SYSTEMS LTD V TRANSCO PLC
Freeing the adjudication genie from its 28-day decision bottle - 2005 - Architects' Journal 221(1) 13 January 2005, 39(1) .
Considers the consequences for adjudicators brought about by a cluster of cases decided by the Technology and Construction Court. The Judge in particular questioned whether it was possible for an adjudicator to come to a conclusion to a case within a 28-day process. For example, in "AWG Construction Services Ltd v Rockingham Motor Speedway Ltd" ([2004] EWHC 88 (TCC), [2004] TCLR 6) the adjudication process was rendered unenforceable by AWG not having a proper opportunity to consider new material produced. Judge Toulmin found that the test for deciding whether a dispute was suitable for adjudication was not if it was too complex but whether an adjudicator could reach a fair decision within the time agreed between the parties.
MANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION-ADJUDICATION
MANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION-ADJUDICATION-ADJUDICATORS
AWG CONSTRUCTION LTD V ROCKINGHAM MOTOR SPEEDWAY LTD
BREACHES OF NATURAL JUSTICE
CIB PROPERTIES LTD V BIRSE CONSTRUCTION LTD
MCALPINE PPS PIPELINE SYSTEMS LTD V TRANSCO PLC