Monthly Archives: July 2010

REUTERS | Juan Carlos Ulate
July 28, 2010

July 2010 digest: ODA, BSF and third party rights

In the words of Henry James:

“Summer afternoon, summer afternoon; to me those have always been the two most beautiful words in the English language.”

This time last year, all the talk was about who would win the Ashes (we did); last month the focus was on the World Cup (Spain won); and now it seems that attention has (finally) turned to the London 2012 Olympic Games, which start in just two years time. So far, it is a good news story, with the ODA’s latest report indicating that construction remains ahead of schedule. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Lisi Niesner
July 28, 2010

City Inn v Shepherd Construction: what does it mean for extension of time claims?

Adjudication has contributed much to the construction industry since it was introduced by the Construction Act 1996. On the whole, disputes are resolved more quickly (if not more fairly) and, after some initial scepticism, the industry as a whole has come to accept, if not love, this “new” form of dispute resolution. It is perhaps a measure of adjudication’s success that very few disputes progress beyond the provisional but binding decision of the adjudicator. By and large, parties appear to live with the decision or use it as the platform for a negotiated settlement.

Continue reading →

REUTERS | Toru Hanai
July 28, 2010

Collateral warranties, a standstill agreement and a concurrent tort claim

One multi-party (and multi-action) Technology and Construction Court (TCC) claim involving Linklaters, Sir Robert McAlpine and others is under scrutiny by commentators at the moment. While it is important to remember that the latest installment, like the previous one, is still at the pre-trial (interlocutory) stage, what can we learn from How Engineering v Southern Insulation? Continue reading →

REUTERS | Mike Blake
July 27, 2010

Adjudicators make mistakes, occasionally

I read a nice little judgment the other day. It was by Lord Glennie in the Scottish Court of Session. One of the issues before the court was whether the adjudicator had made a number of mistakes when reviewing one of the parties’ submissions, meaning that he either exceeded his jurisdiction, failed to exhaust his jurisdiction (there is that phrase again) or was in breach of the rules of natural justice. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Sean Yong
July 20, 2010

Disclosing previous involvement with the parties

It is commonplace for a potential adjudicator to get asked questions about previous involvement with the parties before he is appointed. All the nominating bodies do it. Solicitors often get involved in the process too. Sometimes the questions go further than just the parties, sometimes you get asked about firms of solicitors or specific individuals, such as the experts involved. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Kim Hong-Ji
July 13, 2010

When should the adjudicator deliver his decision?

I’m sure most people would say the answer to the question of “when should the adjudicator deliver his decision to the parties?” is as soon as he has reached it. Certainly, I know from experience what it is like when you don’t do that.

Therefore, I was rather surprised to read the judgment in Lee v Chartered Properties, and see that an adjudicator had reached his decision on a Friday (and told the parties so), but not delivered it to them until the Monday afternoon. I wasn’t so surprised by Akenhead J’s reaction, or that he failed to enforce the adjudicator’s decision.  Continue reading →

Share this post on: