Adjudication update: were the predictions correct?
Series: Civil Engineering Surveyor ; April 2002, 20-21(2)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-ARBITRATION
- COSTS
- BUILT ENVIRONMENT-BUILDING CONTRACT FORMS
- HOUSING GRANTS, CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996
- CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
- ADJUDICATOR'S AWARDS
- Dispute resolution
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS65355 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 117662-1001 |
Considers the progress made in adjudication since the Construction Act 1996 came into force on 1 May 1998. Highlights the predictions and concerns of lawyers prior to the Act, in particular that the courts would not be able to enforce adjudicators' awards if challenged by the losing party. Illustrates how such fears have not been founded and that courts have generally chosen to enforce the adjudicator's awards. Looks at the number and type of referral going to court and the total costs of taking a dispute to adjudication compared with arbitration. Also emphasises the point that adjudication often ends the dispute, and very few cases have subequently gone to litigation or arbitration. Concludes that adjudication is greatly beneficial to the construction industry.