Up until last week (Friday to be exact), it had been almost 60 days since the TCC published one of its adjudication enforcement judgments on BAILII (and I’m excluding the second Lanes Group’s judgment simply because it was published late, came out of sequence and was pretty much covered in the first judgment).
60 days is a long time for someone who writes a weekly column on a topic like adjudication.
It’s meant I have had to be creative in the interim, with topics such as skills, interest, reasons and referrals. I haven’t quite had to move away from the main substance of this column, but I’ve been getting closer and closer. In the past there has always been a case or two to discuss. Some weeks I have had so much choice, I haven’t known where to start. But not recently.
It’s felt a bit like I’m in the middle of one of those 22-episode American shows. The ones that are full of high drama and implausible story lines. You all probably know the ones I mean, the ones you (perhaps secretly) watch. There is always an episode or two in each 22-episode set where you think “why did they bother?” or “that was a filler episode”. This feels like one of those moments. At least now the court has given me Urang Commercial v Century Investments, so next week there may be something a little more substantial to read.
Until then, I pose a question: “Just what has happened to all the adjudication enforcement judgments?”. I know the TCC and its judges are busy and, it seems, are getting out and about (for example, Coulson J has been to Newcastle), but either they aren’t dealing with enforcement cases, or they aren’t telling anyone about them if they do. If it is the former, does that mean parties are paying up? I don’t know what to think if it is the latter!