| 000 | 01299cab a22002295a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | L139750 | ||
| 008 | 070807e20070712xxk f 000 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u139750 | ||
| 041 | 0 | _aeng | |
| 100 | 1 | _aCottam, Guy | |
| 245 | 0 | 0 | _aUnpacking the case history |
| 260 | _c2007 | ||
| 490 | 0 |
_aConstruction News _v(7026) 12 July 2007, 24(1) |
|
| 520 | _aLooks at why adjudication is being used in situations where it was never intended, such as complex disputes and final accounts, and highlights the problems this is causing with the Scheme for Construction Contracts (SCC). A key point is that the SCC does not allow an adjudicator to consider more than one dispute at a time. Discusses this issue with reference to "Bothma (trading as DAB Builders) v Mayhaven Healthcare" ([2007] EWCA Civ 527, L139846). Notes that under the SCC, there must be a link between all the decisions required of the adjudicator. | ||
| 590 | _aKA | ||
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aHOUSING GRANTS, CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996 |
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aSCHEME FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS |
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aBOTHMA V MAYHAVEN HEALTHCARE LTD |
| 651 | 4 |
_aGreat Britain _y1707- |
|
| 690 | _aMANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION-ADJUDICATION | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 999 |
_c79082 _d79082 |
||