header-logo header-logo

ADR for professional negligence

26 July 2018 / Masood Ahmed
Issue: 7803 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Professional negligence , ADR
printer mail-detail
nlj_7803_ahmed

Quick, flexible and cost-effective: Masood Ahmed explains the Professional Negligence Adjudication Scheme

  • Provides an overview of the Professional Negligence Adjudication Scheme.
  • Summarises the results from the Scheme pilot.

The Professional Negligence Adjudication Scheme is a novel and entirely voluntary alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedure for professional negligence disputes. It is based on the statutory adjudication scheme that enables parties to a construction dispute to obtain a swift interim decision on disputes. The intention behind the scheme is to enable parties to a professional negligence dispute to obtain a quick adjudication of their dispute, at relatively minimal cost, which will be binding upon the parties unless one or both of them wish to take the matter to a court or an arbitration hearing. The scheme documents can be found on the Professional Negligence Bar Association (PNBA) website here.

The Pre-action Protocol for Professional Negligence Disputes now specifically refers to the Scheme. Paragraph 6(i) of the Protocol states that the letter of claim should, inter alia, include: ‘An indication of whether the

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll