Picture this scenario: the construction contract provides that, in the event that the parties cannot agree the identity of the adjudicator, the adjudicator will be nominated by the President or Vice President of a named adjudicator nominating body (ANB).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/01c70/01c70d7573bc085cc61b8e6b2cce63542f206879" alt=""
Nomination of the adjudicator by an ANB
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/71279/712795f9e39836d8bb4d421e6e949eac1c9ec27e" alt=""
TCC e-working, or is it?
Given that, from 1 April 2010, the e-working pilot scheme will become permanent, allowing parties to submit claims and take subsequent steps in the litigation electronically, now seems a good time to review what we have learnt so far from the pilot.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/54f18/54f18a6e0de57543f179a43187f0e1bff184fc26" alt=""
Using Part 8 to finally determine issues and enforce part only of an adjudicator’s decision
The recently released judgment of Edwards-Stuart J in Geoffrey Osborne Limited v Atkins Rail could have a major impact upon adjudication enforcement and substantially affect the enforceability of adjudicators’ decisions.
It raises two important issues:
- The use of CPR Part 8 proceedings to avoid enforcement.
- Obtaining final determination of only part of a dispute. Continue reading
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eaa00/eaa00346f0e110174bf1634959081294f6c49365" alt=""
An adjudicator’s use of evidence and natural justice
It seems parties are always trying to think up clever and interesting arguments to resist enforcement of an adjudicator’s decision. Often they rely on alleged breaches of the rules of natural justice, which is an amorphous term for all sorts of alleged wrong-doing. Adjudicators have to be careful, although, even when they are, it seems they still face these allegations with increasing frequency. A case in point is ROK v Celtic. Continue reading