| 000 | 01160cam a2200229 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ABS63979 | ||
| 008 | 000000n2001 000 0 eng u | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u112794 | ||
| 100 | _aBingham, T | ||
| 245 | _aGet real, m'lud | ||
| 260 | _c2001 | ||
| 490 |
_aBuilding _v266(8184) 11 May 2001, 47-48(2) |
||
| 520 | _aWith reference to the case of "Discain v Opecprime", argues that adjudicators should be free to telephone one party without the presence of the other party during the 28 day period in order to clarify evidence. Suggests that Judge Bowsher's recommendation in "Discain v Opecprime" of limiting one-to-one telephone calls to an administrative nature to avoid appearing impartial, is unrealistic given the level of investigation required in a short timescale. | ||
| 590 | _aABS | ||
| 650 | _aMANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION-ADJUDICATION | ||
| 650 | _aIMPARTIALITY | ||
| 650 | _aTELEPHONE | ||
| 650 | _aCOMMUNICATION | ||
| 650 | _aDISCAIN PROJECT SERVICES LTD V OPECPRIME DEVELOPMENT LTD | ||
| 690 |
_aDispute resolution _96236 |
||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 999 |
_c67149 _d67149 |
||