000			01642cam a2200217 4500
001			ABS64525
008			010928n2001 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u114912
100			_aBrewer, G.
245			_aProcedural errors by adjudicators
260			_c2001
490			_aContract Journal _v410(6346) 26 September 2001, 23(1)
520			_aObserves that, since the introduction of adjudication under the Construction Act 1996, it has become increasingly clear that adjudicators need to be highly skilled in conducting the proceedings put before them. The parties have become ever more alert to the opportunities and pitfalls presented by the payment provisions of the Act. Similarly, lawyers have devised arguments of increasing subtlety to resist the enforcement of adjudicators' decisions. Illustrates these points through discussion of the decision of the Outer House of the Court of Session in Scotland in two cases between Barr and Law Mining. The implication of the court's ruling is that procedural errors by the adjudicator, in respect of the crystallisation of the matters in dispute, may give rise to an error in jurisdiction. This will render all, or part of, the decision unenforceable.
590			_aABS
650			_aBARR LTD V LAW MINING LTD
650			_aMANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION-ADJUDICATION-ADJUDICATORS
650			_aMANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ARBITRATION
650			_aPROCEDURAL ERROR
690			_aDispute resolution _96236
942			_n0
999			_c68422 _d68422