Hands off our law
Series: Building ; 167(8233) 10 May 2002 49(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
- RG CARTER V EDMUND NUTTALL
- BALFOUR BEATTY CONSTRUCTION V LAMBETH B C
- MACOB CIVIL ENGINEERING LTD V MORRISON CONSTRUCTION LTD
- Dispute resolution
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS65497 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 118146-1001 |
Discusses the recent trend for judges to disparage the use of arbitration in the settlement of disputes, even overturning arbitrators' decisions on appeal. Argues that it is up to parliament and the construction industry to decide how adjudication can and should be used in practice, not the judiciary. Refers to cases such as RG Carter v Edmund Nuttall where the judge produced a definition of dispute that is causing considerable problems for both adjudicators and parties.