header-logo header-logo

13 November 2015 / Martin Burns
Issue: 7676 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

Building bridges

nlj_7676_burns

The use of arbitration to resolve construction & engineering disputes is back in fashion, says Martin Burns

The low point for the UK construction and engineering arbitration sector occurred on 1 May 1998. It was the day the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 came into force, and adjudication started on its inexorable rise to become the pre-eminent method to determining contract disputes.

The decline of arbitration & rise of adjudication

In the years that followed, the number of arbitrations fell off a cliff while adjudication flourished. In 1995, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) appointed around 400 construction arbitrators; in 1998, only about 40 arbitrators were appointed, compared to 23 adjudicators. Last year, 10 arbitrators were appointed by RICS compared to nearly 900 adjudicators.

The decline in the popularity of arbitration actually began long before adjudication came on the scene. Even in the 1980s the process of arbitrating disputes had become inordinately slow and immensely expensive. Parties, particularly those that were involved in low-value disputes about relatively unsophisticated issues, had become disenfranchised from

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll