You'll pay for this
Series: Building ; (8214) 14 December 2001, 39(1)Publication details: 2001Subject(s):- MANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION-ADJUDICATION-ADJUDICATORS
- HOUSING GRANTS, CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996
- STUBBS RICH ARCHITECTS V WH TOLLY & SON LTD
- PAUL JENSON V STAVELEY
- FEES REGULATION
- DISPUTE RESOLUTION
- BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION-LAW
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS64867 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 116207-1001 |
Considers two cases relating to adjudication. Argues that there are problems with the Construction Act 1996 as it does not provide for a statutory right for the adjudicator to hold on to his decision until his fee is paid. In Stubbs Rich Architects v WH Tolly & Son Ltd, the judge decided that a first court was wrong to compare work of a solicitor with that of an adjudicator. Further, in Paul Jenson v Straveley Industries PLC, Mr Jenson, the adjudicator sued the company that refused to pay his fees. The judge decided it was not the business of the court to decide whether an adjudicator was right or wrong.