header-logo header-logo

Adjudicator fees

21 May 2009 / Sean Brannigan KC , Elspeth Owens
Issue: 7370 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs , Fees
printer mail-detail

Sean Brannigan QC & Elspeth Owens look closely at who pays fees & costs in adjudications

* * * * * *

Parties responding to adjudications commenced under the Housing Grants and Regeneration Act 1996 often take objections relating to jurisdiction, and proceed with their response to those adjudications “without prejudice” to those fundamental objections.

That often poses the following real difficulty for adjudicators: if those jurisdictional objections are found to be valid, and the party commencing the adjudication is unable to meet any liability for costs, how will the adjudicator be paid?

From the perspective of the party taking a valid jurisdictional objection, being forced to pay such fees is obviously somewhat unpalatable. Similarly, however, from the perspective of the adjudicator, uncertainty as to whether any claim for fees against a responding party would be enforceable introduces a highly unwelcome degree of uncertainty, particularly in time-heavy and intensive adjudications, where the fees “at stake” might be very large.

Jurisdictional

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Winckworth Sherwood—Tim Foley

Winckworth Sherwood—Tim Foley

Property litigation practice strengthened by partner hire

Kingsley Napley—Romilly Holland

Kingsley Napley—Romilly Holland

International arbitration team specialist joins the team

Red Lion Chambers—Maurice MacSweeney

Red Lion Chambers—Maurice MacSweeney

Set creates new client and business development role amid growth

NEWS
The rank of King’s Counsel (KC) has been awarded to 96 barristers, and no solicitors, in the latest silk round
Neurotechnology is poised to transform contract law—and unsettle it. Writing in NLJ this week, Harry Lambert, barrister at Outer Temple Chambers and founder of the Centre for Neurotechnology & Law, and Dr Michelle Sharpe, barrister at the Victorian Bar, explore how brain–computer interfaces could both prove and undermine consent
Comparators remain the fault line of discrimination law. In this week's NLJ, Anjali Malik, partner at Bellevue Law, and Mukhtiar Singh, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, review a bumper year of appellate guidance clarifying how tribunals should approach ‘actual’ and ‘evidential’ comparators. A new six-stage framework stresses a simple starting point: identify the treatment first
In cross-border divorces, domicile can decide everything. In NLJ this week, Jennifer Headon, legal director and head of international family, Isobel Inkley, solicitor, and Fiona Collins, trainee solicitor, all at Birketts LLP, unpack a Court of Appeal ruling that re-centres nuance in jurisdiction disputes. The court held that once a domicile of choice is established, the burden lies on the party asserting its loss
Can a chief constable be held responsible for disobedient officers? Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth, professor of public law at De Montfort University, examines a Court of Appeal ruling that answers firmly: yes
back-to-top-scroll