Practical Law

What steps can an adjudicator take to safeguard a decision against a challenge for breach of the rules of natural justice? When will a court refuse to enforce an award on natural justice grounds? And should adjudicators even be under a duty to comply with the rules of natural justice? These are all topics that … Continue reading What is natural justice in adjudication? →

Part 8 of the LDEDC Act 2009 comes into force next month. One of the most radical changes it makes to Part II of the Construction Act 1996 is the repeal of the requirement (in section 107) that the construction contract be made in writing. From 1 October 2011, construction contracts need no longer be in writing … Continue reading What is the effect of extending the adjudication regime to oral contracts? →

Last week, Lindsay Collett of Berwin Leighton Paisner LLP reported on Edwards-Stuart J’s presentation on e-working in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) to the TeCSA and TECBAR annual joint conference. Akenhead J, the Judge in charge of the TCC, also reported more generally at the conference on TCC news.

Ramsey J gave the keynote speech at the joint TeCSA/TECBAR conference on 28 June 2010, which was attended by around 80 solicitors and barristers.

As the new broom in the TCC, Edwards-Stuart J has carried out some important spring cleaning and, in Yuanda v WW Gear, he has delivered possibly the most significant decision in construction law so far this year.

Adjudication was originally conceived as a quick and convenient means of resolving disputes during the life of a project. Increasingly, adjudication has become popular as a means of resolving disputes after practical completion. But what about disputes concerning the termination of the contract itself?

Responding parties often argue that they have been the victim of an ambush by the referring party, but what is an ambush and why does it matter?

Much has been written in recent months about the proposed amendments to the Construction Act 1996. It is not yet clear how many of these amendments will survive the next stages of the legislative enquiry.

I agree with the recent MCMS post that 2009 is likely to see an increased use of the CPR Part 8 procedure to bring jurisdictional challenges before or during an adjudication.