Last week I participated in Practical Law’s breakfast roundtable, Adjudication appointment tactics: The do’s and don’ts following recent case law. The roundtable was led by Fionnuala McCredie QC and Paul Bury, barristers at Keating Chambers, and Suber Akther, solicitor-advocate at Siemens plc, who were the legal team involved in Eurocom Ltd v Siemens plc.
The workshop explored the various tactics that parties may use when seeking to obtain adjudication appointments, looking at the issues from the perspectives of both the referring party and the responding party. Our discussions centred on the nomination process and the issues that arose in Eurocom.
While Chatham House rules do not permit me to reveal all that was said, what I can tell you is how enjoyable the session was. It started with an overview of Eurocom from Fionnuala, Paul and Suber, followed by the delegates splitting into four groups to discuss a fictitious scenario (involving the restoration of an Elizabethan folly) among themselves, before reporting back to the room.
We considered that by remaining open and transparent throughout the nomination process, a party could influence it without falling foul of the misrepresentation situation in Eurocom. For example, we looked at ways that information about the dispute could be conveyed to the nominating body on the nomination form to ensure an adjudicator with particular attributes was appointed. We also considered specific wording related to the adjudicator’s professional background and individuals that may have a conflict of interest in the case.
These workshops are a fantastic opportunity to receive practical guidance and work through the challenges and issues that everyone faces, and to meet and network with industry professionals. They are provided by Practical Law’s online learning solution at legalpd.com.
If you missed this session, the slides are available here and you will be able to watch Fionnuala and Paul discuss these issues from 8 April.
