000 01256cab a22002175a 4500
001 L140162
008 070910e20070907xxk f 000 0 eng d
035 _a(Sirsi) u140162
041 0 _aeng
100 1 _aBessey, James
245 _aOpening Pandora's box
260 _c2007
490 0 _aBuilding
_v272(8496) 7 September 2007, 55(1)
520 _aDiscusses the possible implications of government proposals to remove the requirement for construction contracts to be in writing. Argues that this proposal would let the adjudicator decide what the contract is or not, which could lead to a number of problems. Suggests there may be an increase in the use of clauses that aim to exclude anything extraneous from being part of the contract. In addition, more cases could follow on from adjudication because the adjudicator incorrectly concludes what the contract is.
590 _aKA
650 2 4 _aHOUSING GRANTS, CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996 PART II
651 4 _aGreat Britain
_y1707-
690 _aMANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION-ADJUDICATION
690 _aBUILT ENVIRONMENT-CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT-BUILDING CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
942 _n0
999 _c79211
_d79211