Abstract
AbstractConstruction adjudication as envisaged by early promoters of this form of dispute resolution was intended to be quick, dirty, and inexpensive. Speed was to be catered for by strict time limits and the sometimes-dirty results were allowed for by the possibility of appeal after the project was completed. Expense was to be controlled by using practice-based adjudicators with powers to take the initiative in examining the law and facts, and it was not expected that parties would be accompanied by large and expensive legal teams. The case study reported in this paper indicates a somewhat different picture. Time limits were observed and decisions were anything but dirty and have been observed by the parties. However, the costs amount to around one-third of the amount in dispute, and both protagonists are very much in a lose-lose situation. This paper examines the issue of costs in adjudication and proposes further research, particularly related to expert’s fees and using disputes advisory boards for sma...
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.