Sypro’s Post

Adjudication processes under FIDIC contracts, the Scheme for Construction Contracts, and the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act (HGCRA) . Part 2 : Adjudication under HGCRA 1. Framework: The Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (amended 2011) mandates adjudication as a right in all construction contracts in the UK. 2. Appointment: An adjudicator is appointed on an ad-hoc basis for each dispute. Parties can agree on an adjudicator or refer to a nominating body. 3. Role: Adjudication under HGCRA is intended for quick resolution of disputes to keep projects moving. 4. Timeframe: Similar to the Scheme, the adjudicator must reach a decision within 28 days, with possible extensions if agreed by parties. 5. Binding Nature: Decisions are provisionally binding, enforceable until final settlement by arbitration, litigation, or agreement. 6. Legislative Basis: HGCRA provides a statutory right to adjudication, ensuring all construction contracts include or imply a compliant adjudication process. Key Differences 1. Origin and Basis: - FIDIC: Contractual, specific to FIDIC contracts. - Scheme: Statutory, for contracts without compliant adjudication provisions. - HGCRA: Statutory, mandating adjudication rights in all UK construction contracts. 2. Appointment and Structure: - FIDIC: Often involves a standing DAB appointed at the project's start. - Scheme: Ad-hoc adjudicator for each dispute. - HGCRA: Ad-hoc adjudicator appointed as disputes arise, with statutory backing. 3. Timeframe: - FIDIC: Generally 84 days for decisions. - Scheme and HGCRA: 28 days for decisions, extendable with consent. 4. Binding Nature: All frameworks require interim compliance with adjudicator decisions, pending final resolution. 5. Scope and Application: - FIDIC: Specific to projects using FIDIC contracts, often international. - Scheme: A fallback for UK contracts without adequate adjudication clauses. - HGCRA: Ensures all UK construction contracts have a right to adjudication. #Construction #Law #adjudication #arbitration #dispute #project #management #contract #administration #fidic #Scheme #housing #grants #act #HGCRA

Did you know there is a Low Value Dispute Model Adjudication Procedure? 💷 The cost of a resolving a dispute is a legitimate consideration when deciding the most appropriate method. Some companies have discounted Adjudication as a viable option due to concerns relating to the Adjudicator's fees when compared with the value of the dispute. 📃 The Construction Industry Council (CIC) have published the Low Value Disputes Model Adjudication Procedure (MAP). The purpose of the MAP is to provide a streamlined Adjudication procedure for low value disputes. The Adjudicator's fees are capped depending on the value of the dispute. The ranges are as follows: 🔹 £10,000 = £2,000 🔹 £10,001 to £25,000 = £2,500 🔹 £25,001 to £50,000 = £3,500 🔹 £50,001 to £75,000 = £4,500 🔹 £75,001 to £100,000 = £5,000 🔹 Over £100k - Negotiable ⚠ It is important to note that these caps only relate to the Adjudicator's fees and not the cost of taking part in the Adjudication. But the cap does provide some certainty before deciding to refer a dispute to Adjudication. ✅ This is an adjudication procedure that complies with the Construction Act. If the rules of Adjudication in your contract refer to the Scheme for Construction Contracts as the rules of the Adjudication you can still use this model as it compiles with it. ❌ You don't need to obtain the consent of the other party to use this model if the Scheme for Construction Contracts applies to your contract. 👍 We understand that the cost of taking part of the Adjudication is not recoverable, even if a party is successful. 🤝 However, we can discuss the agreement of a cap for representing clients in an adjudication for low value disputes to provide even greater certainty with respect to the cost of referring a dispute to Adjudication. #obsidyan #adjudication #lvd #ADR

Construction Contracts and Guides: CCDC 2 -2020 Stipulated Price Contract #ConstructionContracts #CCDC9 #ConstructionLaw #ContractManagement #ProgressPayment #ConstructionGuide #ContractorLife #BuildingIndustry #LegalConstruction #ContractorResources #CCDC2 #ConstructionTips

Our next instalment in the adjudication series provides an overview of the process, along with some practical considerations. It's vitally important to understand the process as it is prescribed by the Construction Contracts Act 2002 - it moves quickly and failing to act may be fatal to your claim! It's also important to understand how the process can be tailored to your dispute. Let me know if you would like to discuss anything contained in this article.

Adjudication processes under FIDIC contracts, the Scheme for Construction Contracts, and the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act (HGCRA) . Part 1 : FIDIC Adjudication 1. Framework: FIDIC contracts, such as the Red Book, include provisions for a Dispute Adjudication Board (DAB). 2. Appointment: DAB members are typically appointed at the start of the project and can be a standing board. 3. Role: The DAB acts continuously throughout the project, resolving disputes as they arise. 4. Timeframe: The DAB generally has 84 days to deliver a decision. 5. Binding Nature: DAB decisions are binding on an interim basis. Parties must comply unless and until the decision is revised by arbitration or litigation. 6. Familiarity: A standing DAB offers continuous involvement, providing deeper project insight. Adjudication under the Scheme for Construction Contracts 1. Framework: The Scheme serves as a statutory fallback mechanism provided by the Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998 (amended 2011), applicable when contracts lack compliant adjudication provisions. 2. Appointment: An adjudicator is appointed ad-hoc when a dispute arises. 3. Role: The adjudicator is tasked with resolving specific disputes brought before them. 4. Timeframe: Decisions must be made within 28 days of referral, extendable with both parties' consent. 5. Binding Nature: Decisions are binding on an interim basis, enforceable until final resolution by arbitration or litigation. 6. Simplicity: The Scheme offers a straightforward, quick resolution mechanism, emphasizing cash flow maintenance. #Construction #Law #adjudication #arbitration #dispute #project #management #contract #administration #fidic #Scheme #housing #grants #act #HGCRA

A recent adjudication enforcement case has given interesting and relatively rare judicial consideration on use of the Slip Rule. Paragraph 22A of the of the Scheme for Construction Contracts Regulations 1998 enables an Adjudicator to “on his own initiative or on the application of a party correct his decision so as to remove a clerical or typographical error arising by accident or omission”. The Slip Rule is typically used to correct typos, incorrect names or calculations. In the case of McLaughlin & Harvey Ltd v LJJ Ltd (attached) MHL applied for summary judgment to enforce a decision directing its subcontractor, LJJ, to pay an award of £800,000. The adjudicator issued his original decision in MHL’s favour in October 2023. Following submissions by LJJ to amend the decision (and numerous emails thereafter), the adjudicator issued a revised decision. LJJ resisted enforcement on the basis that (1) the original decision had been superseded and (2) even if there had been an error, it was within the jurisdiction of the adjudicator such that the Court should not interfere. In the revised decision, the adjudicator found there was a substantive matter which he had not adequately addressed and amended the decision to take account of the points made by LJJ. Reasoning was added to clarify or qualify the decision. The Court found that this went beyond the scope of the Slip Rule. Therefore, the adjudicator had purported to exercise a power which he did not have. It follows that, once again, the decision was enforced. Although there are commonly submissions in the aftermath of the decision, this case clarifies that the Slip Rule is not to be used to clarify or qualify a decision. It is clear from the Court’s concerns that further rounds of submissions after a decision should be avoided, which is not the intention of adjudication. 

More changes are coming to the Adjudication process in construction contracts. Changes include a database of past determinations which will be very interesting to see precidence. Also, ODACC will allow private adjudicators, which also seems like an interesting change - especially for consultants. Do you thing a private consultant providing adjudication services for construction contract would be a valuable service? https://lnkd.in/eC8gTZa4

Navigating DBP Act Compliance For strata managers and building practitioners, compliance with the Design and Building Practitioners Act (DBP Act) is essential to ensuring project success and reducing risk. At Sydney Strata Engineers, we simplify the process to help you meet all requirements confidently. 3 Essential Compliance Tips: 1️⃣ Engage Registered Professionals Ensure all designs and declarations are prepared by registered practitioners to meet BCA requirements. 2️⃣ Document Everything Maintain thorough records throughout the project lifecycle, including defect inspections, designs, and remediation plans. 3️⃣ Verify Before Construction Confirm all regulated designs and compliance declarations are submitted prior to commencing work. Need assistance with DBP Act compliance? Contact us for expert guidance and structural practitioner services. 📧 admin@sydneystrataengineers.com.au 🌐 https://lnkd.in/gp6H55hM #DBPAct #BuildingCompliance #StrataManagement #SydneyStrataEngineers

In discussion with PBC Today & BIM Today: Dr Stuart Kings highlights the growing need to improve contract management practices 💭 This comes after statistics from King's College London and The Adjudication Society identified a 9% increase in construction adjudications in 2024, the largest contributor being "poor contract management". #Construction #ContractManagement #Compliance

A cracking read!