So who stands to benefit from adjudicator's nice little earner?
Series: Architects' Journal ; 215(1) 10 January 2002, 50(1)Publication details: 2002Subject(s):- 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
- LEGAL FEES
- WITHHOLDING PAYMENT
- PAYMENT
- MANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-EXPERT WITNESSES
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS65030 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 116575-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
Discusses the payment of adjudicators, whether the company or the individual should be paid. Questions whether the person or the company is appointed when the appointment of an adjudicator is made and whether, if payment is withheld, the adjudicator sues in his own name or in the name of their company. Quotes the example of a recent case, "Faithful and Gould Ltd v Arcal Ltd and others". Concludes that adjudicators should ensure that they submit their own terms and conditions to the parties for agreement before agreeing to the appointment and to state who should be invoiced.