Image from Google Jackets

Householders are not bound by 'unfair' adjudication provisions

By: Series: Architects' Journal ; 217(9) 6 March 2003, 42(1) | Construction News ; (6813) 24 April 2003, 16(1)Publication details: 2003Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: Looks at adjudication issues raised under the RIBA "Conditions for the appointment of an architect (CE/99) for use with a letter of appointment". This form has been re-drafted to include adjudication provisions for domestic projects, a category left out of mandatory adjudication clauses in contracts. In "Picardi v Cuniberti"[2003] the householders argued they had not signed up to a draft copy of CE/99 sent by the architect, and also that its adjudication provisions were unfair and should not bind them. Judge emphasised the architects' failure to go through the contract highlighting specific clauses on adjudication to them. Concluded that the adjudication provisions, together with CE/99 clauses were unfair. View judgment at http://www.bailii.org
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Journal article London Journal article ABS66515 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 121787-1001

Looks at adjudication issues raised under the RIBA "Conditions for the appointment of an architect (CE/99) for use with a letter of appointment". This form has been re-drafted to include adjudication provisions for domestic projects, a category left out of mandatory adjudication clauses in contracts. In "Picardi v Cuniberti"[2003] the householders argued they had not signed up to a draft copy of CE/99 sent by the architect, and also that its adjudication provisions were unfair and should not bind them. Judge emphasised the architects' failure to go through the contract highlighting specific clauses on adjudication to them. Concluded that the adjudication provisions, together with CE/99 clauses were unfair. View judgment at http://www.bailii.org

Previous
Back to results
Next
Close