Does the adjudicator really have the final say?
Series: Contract Journal ; 406(6309) 10 January 2001, 20(1)Publication details: 2001Subject(s):- MANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION-ADJUDICATION
- DISPUTE RESOLUTION
- ELANAY CONTRACTS LTD V VESTRY
- ENFORCEMENT
- CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 6
- HOUSING GRANTS CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996 S108(3)
- ISSUE ESTOPPEL
- THE VESTRY V ELANAY CONTRACTS LTD
- MANGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS63510 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 110518-1001 |
Considers "Elanay Contracts Ltd v The Vestry" a recent case where it was argued that the Court should resist enforcing the adjudicator's decision on the following grounds: that if summary judgment was given V would be unable to raise the disputed matters as 'issue estoppel' prevents the same matters being litigated twice; that, if V was ordered to make payment, different proceedings than those before the arbitrator would have to be taken and that accordingly the dispute could not be finally determined by legal proceedings as envisaged by the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 s108(3); and finally that the adjudication process contravened Article 6 of the European Convention of Human rights.