000			01633cab a2200217 4500
001			ABS67513
008			040304n2004 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u125327
100			_aBrewer, G.
245		4	_aThe adjudication ambush
260			_c2004
490			_aContract Journal _v421(6458) 14 January 2004, 22(1)
520			_aLooks at issues raised in "London and Amsterdam Properties Ltd v Waterman Partnership Ltd" ([2003] EWHC 3059 (TCC), [2004 BLR 179-205(26). The defendant W was an engineering company retained by claimant L on a large development project. L claimed W had caused critical delays to the project by failing to release design information by set dates. W denied liability. L served notice to seek adjudication. W submitted that the adjudicator's decision should not be enforced for various reasons, including that W had been ambushed and there was procedural unfairness in L's late reliance on significant new material, which it had failed to supply to W before the referral. Enforcement of the adjudicator's decision was refused on the grounds that it was a breach of natural justice as W had not had time to take into account the fresh documentation.
590			_aABS
650			_aMANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION-ADJUDICATION
650			_aLONDON AND AMSTERDAM PROPERTIES LTD V WATERMAN PARTNERSHIP LTD
650			_aBREACHES OF NATURAL JUSTICE
650			_aCONSTRUCTION DISPUTES
690			_aMANGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION
942			_n0
999			_c74234 _d74234