Dispute Resolution

Adjudication is a statutory dispute‑resolution process that allows parties to a construction contract to obtain a rapid, interim determination of a payment or other dispute. The mechanism is set out in the Construction Act 1996 (as amended) and requires the claimant to serve a notice of adjudication and the respondent to provide a response. The adjudicator, who must be independent and impartial, issues a decision that is binding on the parties until the dispute is finally resolved by arbitration, litigation or agreement. Adjudication certificate may be issued to confirm the amount payable. The speed of the process (normally 28 days) makes it attractive for contractors seeking cash flow, but the interim nature of the decision can lead to strategic use of the process to delay final settlement.

Adjudicator refers to the individual or body appointed to decide the dispute under adjudication. The adjudicator must possess appropriate expertise in construction law and practice, and must not have a conflict of interest. In practice, many parties engage specialist adjudication firms that maintain panels of qualified adjudicators. A key challenge for the adjudicator is to balance a swift determination with the need for a reasoned decision, especially when complex technical evidence is involved.

Adjudication determination is the written decision rendered by the adjudicator. It sets out the amount owed, any interest, and may include directions for payment. The determination is enforceable as a binding adjudication award and can be recovered through the courts if the losing party fails to comply. A common practical difficulty is that the determination may be based on limited evidence, leading parties to contest its accuracy at a later stage. Nonetheless, the enforceability of the award provides a strong incentive for compliance.

Arbitration is an alternative dispute‑resolution (ADR) method whereby the parties agree to submit their dispute to one or more arbitrators whose decision—known as an arbitral award—is final and binding. Arbitration offers flexibility in procedure, the ability to select arbitrators with specialised technical knowledge, and confidentiality. In the United Kingdom, arbitration is governed by the Arbitration Act 1996, which provides a framework for the conduct of proceedings, the powers of the tribunal, and the grounds for setting aside an award. A typical construction arbitration may be conducted under institutional rules such as those of the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) or the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). Practical challenges include the cost of arbitration, the time taken to reach a final award (often 12‑18 months), and the difficulty of enforcing an award against a foreign party without a reciprocal enforcement treaty.

Arbitrator is the person—or panel of persons—appointed to hear the dispute and render the award. Arbitrators are expected to be neutral, independent, and possess expertise in construction law, engineering, or the relevant trade. Parties may agree on a sole arbitrator or a three‑member tribunal, often with each side appointing one arbitrator and the two appointing a chair. The selection process can be contentious, especially where parties seek to influence the tribunal’s composition. Moreover, arbitrators must manage procedural matters such as document production, witness statements, and expert evidence, balancing efficiency with thoroughness.

Arbitral award is the final decision issued by the arbitrator(s). The award may be a monetary sum, an order for specific performance, or a declaration of rights. Under the Arbitration Act 1996, an award is enforceable in England and Wales as a judgment of the High Court, and can be recognized and enforced in other jurisdictions under the New York Convention. However, the award can be challenged on limited grounds—such as serious procedural irregularity, bias, or jurisdictional error—making the scope of appeal narrow. In practice, parties often negotiate a settlement after the award is rendered to avoid the costs of enforcement.

Binding dispute resolution clause is a contractual provision that obliges the parties to resolve disputes through a specified ADR mechanism, such as adjudication, arbitration, or mediation. The clause must be clear, unambiguous, and comply with statutory requirements (e.G., The Construction Act’s adjudication provisions). A well‑drafted clause will set out the sequence of steps, timeframes, and the governing law. For example, a clause may require that any payment dispute first be referred to adjudication, and if not resolved, then proceed to arbitration. Poorly drafted clauses can lead to disputes over their interpretation, causing delays and additional costs.

Mediation is a voluntary, non‑binding process whereby an independent third party—the mediator—facilitates negotiation between the disputants to reach a mutually acceptable settlement. Mediation is encouraged by the courts as a cost‑effective means of dispute resolution and is often a prerequisite to commencing litigation. In construction disputes, mediation can address technical and relational issues, preserving the commercial relationship. The mediator does not impose a decision; instead, they help the parties explore options, identify interests, and draft a settlement agreement. A challenge for mediation is the need for parties to engage in good‑faith negotiation; without genuine intent to settle, the process may be a waste of time and resources.

Negotiation is the most informal form of dispute resolution, involving direct discussions between the parties, often with legal advisers present. Negotiation allows for flexible solutions, such as adjusting the contract schedule, agreeing on a variation price, or granting extensions of time. While negotiation is not a formal process, it can be influenced by the contractual framework, such as the presence of a dispute resolution clause that requires parties to attempt negotiation before progressing to adjudication or arbitration. Negotiation can be hampered by entrenched positions, lack of information, or power imbalances.

Dispute resolution board (DRB) is a panel of experts appointed at the outset of a construction project to provide ongoing advice and to resolve disputes as they arise. The DRB may issue determinations that are either advisory or binding, depending on the contract terms. DRBs are common in large infrastructure projects, where early resolution of technical issues can prevent costly delays. The board’s composition typically includes a chairman and two members, each with engineering and legal expertise. A practical challenge is ensuring that the DRB’s decisions are respected, especially when parties view the board as merely advisory.

Construction contract is the legal document that sets out the rights, obligations, and remedies of the parties involved in a construction project. Standard forms such as the JCT, NEC, and FIDIC contracts contain built‑in dispute‑resolution mechanisms. Understanding the contract’s provisions—such as the notice provisions, payment terms, and termination clauses—is essential for effectively managing disputes. For instance, the JCT contract includes a specific adjudication clause that mirrors the statutory scheme, while the NEC suite encourages early warning and collaborative resolution.

Notice of adjudication is the formal document served by a claimant to initiate adjudication. The notice must identify the dispute, specify the amount claimed, and state the relief sought. Under the Construction Act, the notice must be served within the time limits set out in the contract or the statutory period (normally six months from the date of the event giving rise to the dispute). Failure to serve a proper notice can result in the adjudication being invalidated, leaving the claimant without the benefit of the adjudication process. Practically, parties must maintain robust document management systems to ensure timely service.

Response to adjudication notice is the counterpart document filed by the respondent, outlining their defence and any counter‑claims. The response must be served within the time limits prescribed by the adjudicator—usually seven days after receipt of the notice. The response may include supporting documents, expert reports, and a statement of the amount (if any) the respondent believes is due. A strategic consideration is whether to admit part of the claim to expedite resolution or to contest the claim fully, weighing the costs of further dispute resolution against the potential exposure.

Interim payment refers to a payment made by the employer to the contractor based on the value of work performed to date, as certified by the contract administrator. Interim payments are central to cash‑flow management and are often the subject of disputes, particularly where the contractor believes the employer has under‑certified the value of work. The statutory adjudication process provides a rapid remedy for payment disputes, allowing the contractor to obtain an adjudication determination on the amount due. However, the interim nature of the payment can lead to repeated adjudications if the underlying issue—such as the accuracy of measurement—is not resolved.

Final account is the concluding statement of the total sum payable under the contract, prepared by the contractor and certified by the contract administrator. The final account includes adjustments for variations, extensions of time, liquidated damages, and retention. Disputes frequently arise at this stage, as parties may disagree on the valuation of variations or the amount of retention to be released. The final account can be the basis for an adjudication or arbitration claim if the parties cannot agree. A common challenge is that the final account may be contested long after practical completion, extending the dispute resolution timeline.

Retention is a portion of the contract sum that is withheld by the employer as security for the contractor’s performance, typically released upon practical completion or after the defects liability period. Retention can be a source of dispute when the employer delays release or when the contractor disputes the amount of retention held. The adjudication process can be used to resolve retention disputes quickly, but the retention amount may be subject to statutory interest if the employer fails to release it on time. Moreover, the use of retention is increasingly being replaced by performance bonds or bank guarantees in modern contracts.

Performance bond is a financial security provided by a bank or insurer that guarantees the contractor’s performance under the contract. In the event of contractor default, the bond can be called upon to cover the cost of completing the works. Performance bonds reduce the need for retention and can be a point of contention when the employer seeks to call the bond. The terms of the bond—such as the notice period and the conditions for drawing—must be clearly understood to avoid disputes. In practice, the bond’s call‑out process can be complex, requiring the employer to prove default and to follow procedural steps stipulated in the bond agreement.

Extension of time (EOT) is a contractual mechanism that allows the contractor to obtain additional time to complete the works when delays are caused by events beyond their control. The contractor must give notice of the delay and provide supporting evidence. An EOT can affect the liquidated damages regime, as the damages are typically calculated on a per‑day basis after the completion date. Disputes arise when the employer refuses to grant an EOT, leading the contractor to claim for delay damages. The adjudication process is often employed to resolve EOT disputes promptly, as time overruns can jeopardise project financing.

Liquidated damages are pre‑agreed sums payable by the contractor to the employer for each day of delay beyond the completion date. The clause is intended to provide certainty and avoid the need to prove actual loss. However, liquidated damages can be contested on the ground of being a penalty if the sum is disproportionate to the anticipated loss. Courts will enforce a liquidated damages clause if it reflects a genuine pre‑estimate of loss. In practice, parties may negotiate a cap on damages or an alternative schedule of damages to avoid excessive liability.

Notice of claim is the formal communication served by a party to inform the other of a breach, a claim for damages, or a request for relief. In construction contracts, a notice of claim often triggers the dispute‑resolution process, such as adjudication or arbitration. The notice must comply with contractual requirements—such as specifying the breach, the remedy sought, and any supporting documents. Failure to serve a proper notice can prejudice a party’s rights, for example, by precluding a later adjudication claim. Effective notice procedures are essential for preserving the right to dispute resolution.

Defect notice is a notice issued by the employer (or their representative) to the contractor identifying defects or incomplete work. The contractor must rectify the defects within a reasonable period. Failure to do so may give rise to a breach of contract, enabling the employer to withhold payment or to terminate the contract. The defect notice can also be the basis for an adjudication claim if the contractor disputes the validity or extent of the defects. In practice, the timing and detail of the defect notice are critical, as an insufficient notice may be deemed ineffective.

Practical completion is a contractual milestone that marks the point at which the works are sufficiently complete for the employer to occupy or use them for their intended purpose, subject to minor defects. Upon practical completion, the contractor is typically entitled to a release of retention and may begin a defects liability period. Disputes often arise over whether practical completion has been achieved, especially when significant defects exist. The determination of practical completion may be made by the contract administrator, but parties can refer the issue to adjudication or arbitration for a binding decision. A common challenge is aligning the practical completion date with the contractor’s cash‑flow needs.

Defects liability period (DLP) is the period following practical completion during which the contractor remains responsible for rectifying any defects identified. The length of the DLP is set out in the contract, often twelve months. The contractor may be required to provide a performance bond or guarantee to cover the cost of defect remediation. Disputes may arise regarding the scope of defects, the contractor’s liability, or the timing of remediation. The DLP can be the subject of adjudication if the employer withholds payment for alleged defects, and the contractor seeks an interim determination.

Termination for default is the right of the employer to terminate the contract when the contractor fails to perform its obligations, such as failing to remedy defects, failing to progress the works, or becoming insolvent. The employer must follow a prescribed procedure—typically serving a notice of termination—before exercising the right. Termination for default can give rise to claims for damages, loss of profit, and other remedies. However, the contractor may contest the termination on procedural grounds or on the basis that the alleged defaults are not material. The adjudication process can be used to resolve disputes over termination quickly, preserving the employer’s ability to re‑engage another contractor.

Termination for convenience is the employer’s right to end the contract without cause, usually subject to compensation for the contractor’s loss. The contract will set out the compensation formula, which may include remaining profit, overheads, and demobilisation costs. Disputes may arise over the amount of compensation, the timing of termination, and the contractor’s entitlement to retention. While termination for convenience is a contractual right, the contractor may challenge the exercise of that right if it believes the employer has acted in bad faith. The dispute may be resolved through adjudication or arbitration, depending on the contract’s dispute‑resolution clause.

Force majeure refers to events beyond the parties’ control that prevent performance of contractual obligations, such as natural disasters, war, or strikes. A force‑majeure clause typically excuses performance for the duration of the event and may allow for an EOT. The clause must be expressly drafted, as courts will not imply a force‑majeure provision. Disputes often centre on whether a particular event qualifies as force majeure and whether the party took reasonable steps to mitigate the impact. Adjudication is commonly used to resolve force‑majeure disputes swiftly, given the time‑sensitive nature of construction projects.

Concurrent delay arises when both the employer and the contractor contribute to a delay in the project schedule. The allocation of responsibility for concurrent delay can affect entitlement to extensions of time and liquidated damages. The law generally holds that when delays are concurrent, neither party may claim damages for the period of overlap, though the contractor may still be entitled to an EOT. Evidence of concurrent delay often requires expert analysis and detailed programme data. Adjudication can be an effective forum for resolving concurrent delay issues, as the adjudicator can assess the evidence rapidly and issue a determination on responsibility.

Concurrent causation is a related concept where multiple causes, some within and some outside the contractor’s control, combine to produce loss. In the context of construction disputes, concurrent causation can affect the apportionment of damages. Courts may apply the “but for” test, but the test can be complex where multiple factors are intertwined. Parties may use adjudication to obtain a quick apportionment of liability, but the limited nature of adjudication may mean that a full analysis of causation is deferred to arbitration or litigation.

Material breach is a breach of contract that goes to the root of the agreement, justifying termination. A material breach may involve non‑payment, failure to complete the works, or serious quality defects. Determining whether a breach is material involves assessing the significance of the breach and its impact on the contract’s purpose. The employer may give the contractor a chance to remedy the breach before terminating, but the timeframe must be reasonable. Disputes over material breach can be contentious, as the contractor may argue the breach is not material, while the employer seeks to terminate. The adjudication process can provide a rapid determination of whether a breach is material, enabling the employer to proceed with termination if necessary.

Substantial performance is a doctrine that allows a party to claim payment when they have performed the contract to a degree that is essentially complete, notwithstanding minor defects. In construction contracts, the contractor may claim substantial performance to trigger payment of the balance, even if a defect notice has been issued. The employer may counter‑claim for the cost of rectifying defects. The test for substantial performance varies, but generally requires that the work is fit for its intended purpose and that any remaining defects are not fundamental. The adjudicator will consider the contract terms, the nature of the defects, and the parties’ conduct to decide whether substantial performance has been achieved.

Step‑in rights are contractual provisions that allow the employer (or a third party) to take over the contractor’s obligations in the event of default or insolvency. Step‑in rights are common in public‑private partnership (PPP) projects, where continuity of works is critical. The step‑in process typically requires the employer to give notice, and may involve the appointment of a new contractor or the mobilisation of the employer’s own resources. Disputes can arise over the scope of the step‑in rights, the compensation payable to the defaulting contractor, and the transition process. The adjudication mechanism can be used to resolve step‑in disputes promptly, ensuring that the project proceeds without undue interruption.

Right to suspend is the contractor’s entitlement to suspend works when the employer fails to fulfil payment obligations or other essential contractual duties. The right to suspend must be exercised in accordance with the contract, typically requiring a written notice specifying the breach and the intended suspension date. The contractor may be entitled to recover costs incurred during the suspension, including demobilisation and remobilisation expenses. Disputes over suspension often focus on whether the contractor’s breach justified the suspension and whether the contractor complied with notice requirements. The adjudication process is frequently employed to resolve suspension disputes, given the need for a swift decision to minimise project disruption.

Right to recover costs is the contractor’s entitlement to claim reimbursement for costs incurred as a result of the employer’s breach, such as additional site supervision, material price increases, or delays. The contract may set out a schedule of rates or a mechanism for agreeing on cost adjustments. Evidence of cost recovery often requires detailed records, invoices, and expert testimony. The adjudicator will assess whether the costs are reasonable and directly attributable to the breach. A challenge in cost recovery disputes is establishing causation and quantifying the loss with sufficient precision.

Retention release is the process by which the employer releases the withheld retention amount to the contractor, typically upon practical completion or after the defects liability period. The contract may stipulate a timetable for release, such as a percentage upon practical completion and the remainder after the DLP. Disputes arise when the employer withholds retention for reasons not contemplated in the contract, such as alleged defects that the contractor disputes. The adjudication process enables the contractor to obtain an interim determination of the amount of retention due, facilitating cash‑flow. However, the final resolution of retention disputes may require arbitration if the parties cannot agree on the extent of defects.

Notice to proceed is the employer’s instruction to the contractor to commence the works, often required before the contractor can mobilise resources and issue invoices. The notice may be conditional on the receipt of a performance bond or insurance. Failure to issue a notice to proceed can delay the commencement of the project and may affect the contractor’s entitlement to extensions of time. In some contracts, the contractor may be entitled to compensation for delay caused by the employer’s failure to issue the notice. The adjudication mechanism can be used to resolve disputes over the timing and validity of the notice.

Payment notice is the employer’s formal communication to the contractor indicating the amount that is payable for the work performed. Under the Construction Act, the payment notice must be served within a specified period (usually five days after the submission of the contractor’s payment application). The notice must detail the amount due, any deductions, and the basis for those deductions. Failure to serve a proper payment notice can result in the contractor’s claim being deemed undisputed, allowing the contractor to refer the matter to adjudication. The payment notice is a cornerstone of the adjudication process, as it defines the dispute’s parameters.

Interim payment certificate is the document issued by the contract administrator (e.G., The architect or surveyor) certifying the value of the work completed to date. The certificate forms the basis for the contractor’s payment claim. Disputes often arise when the contractor believes the certificate undervalues the work, or when the administrator’s assessment is contested. The adjudicator will review the certificate, the contractor’s measurement, and any supporting evidence to determine the correct amount. A common practical challenge is that the adjudicator may have limited time to examine detailed measurement schedules, necessitating concise submissions.

Variation is a change to the scope of works, usually initiated by the employer, that may affect the contract price and the completion date. Variations must be instructed in writing and valued according to the contract’s variation pricing mechanism. Disputes arise when the contractor and employer disagree on the valuation of a variation, the impact on the schedule, or the entitlement to additional time. The adjudication process can be employed to resolve variation disputes quickly, preventing cost escalation and schedule impacts. However, the adjudicator’s limited remit may mean that complex valuation issues are only partially addressed.

Valuation of variations is the process of determining the monetary impact of a change to the works. Contracts may prescribe a schedule of rates, a formula for adjustment, or a negotiation process. The contractor may submit a valuation claim, and the employer may counter‑claim. Evidence may include bills of quantities, unit rates, and cost breakdowns. The adjudicator will consider the contract terms, any agreed rates, and the principle of fair and reasonable pricing. A challenge is that the adjudicator may lack the time to conduct a detailed cost analysis, leading parties to negotiate a settlement after the determination.

Expert witness is a specialist who provides opinion evidence on technical or professional matters. In construction disputes, expert witnesses may be engineers, quantity surveyors, project managers, or cost consultants. The expert prepares a report, may give evidence at a hearing, and may be cross‑examined. The selection of experts is critical, as their credibility can influence the outcome. Parties often engage multiple experts, leading to “expert echo” where opposing experts provide conflicting opinions. The adjudicator may appoint a single joint expert to streamline the process, but this can be contested by parties who prefer independent opinions.

Document production is the process by which parties exchange relevant documents, such as drawings, contracts, correspondence, and site records. In adjudication, the parties are required to disclose documents that support their case, but the scope is limited compared to litigation. Failure to produce documents can result in sanctions, including cost penalties or adverse inferences. Effective document production requires robust record‑keeping and a clear understanding of the documents’ relevance. In practice, parties may withhold documents on the basis of confidentiality or privilege, leading to disputes over disclosure.

Witness statement is a written account of a party’s version of events, signed and verified. In adjudication, witness statements are typically limited to one or two pages per party, focusing on the key facts. The statement must be concise, factual, and supported by documentary evidence. Overly lengthy statements may be rejected by the adjudicator. The witness statement forms the basis of the parties’ case and is used by the adjudicator to assess credibility and relevance.

Cost and expenses refer to the monetary amounts incurred in pursuing or defending a dispute. Under the Construction Act, the prevailing party in adjudication is entitled to recover reasonable costs, including the adjudicator’s fees. The adjudicator may allocate costs based on each party’s conduct and the complexity of the dispute. In arbitration, the costs regime is often more extensive, covering arbitrators’ fees, administrative charges, and legal fees. Parties must consider the cost‑benefit analysis when deciding whether to pursue adjudication, arbitration, or litigation.

Interest is the sum payable on a monetary award, usually calculated at a statutory rate (currently 8% per annum in England and Wales). Interest accrues from the date the sum became due until payment is made. In adjudication, interest is automatically awarded on the adjudicated amount unless the parties agree otherwise. Interest can be a significant component of the total recoverable sum, especially where payment delays are prolonged. Parties must be aware of the interest calculation method to avoid disputes over the amount due.

Enforcement is the process of executing a judgment or award to obtain compliance. In the UK, an adjudication award can be enforced as a judgment of the High Court, allowing the claimant to obtain a writ of control, a charging order, or an attachment of earnings. Arbitration awards are enforceable under the Arbitration Act and, internationally, under the New York Convention. Enforcement can be challenged on grounds of procedural irregularity, lack of jurisdiction, or public policy. Practical challenges include locating assets, dealing with insolvent parties, and navigating cross‑border enforcement.

Set‑off is the right of a party to deduct amounts it owes to the other party from the amount claimed. In construction contracts, the employer may set‑off amounts for defects, liquidated damages, or withheld retention against the contractor’s payment claim. The right to set‑off must be exercised in accordance with contractual notice requirements. Disputes arise when the employer sets off an amount that the contractor disputes, leading to a claim for payment of the set‑off amount. The adjudicator will assess the validity of the set‑off and may order repayment if it is found to be unjustified.

Security of payment is a statutory regime that ensures contractors receive timely payment for work performed. The Construction Act imposes a “pay‑when‑paid” prohibition, requiring the employer to make payments within the contractually agreed periods. The regime also provides for adjudication as a rapid remedy. Failure to comply with the security of payment provisions can result in penalties, interest, and the ability of the contractor to suspend works. The security of payment framework is central to dispute resolution, as many disputes revolve around payment timing and amounts.

Statutory adjudication refers to the adjudication process established by legislation, primarily the Construction Act. The statutory framework sets out the procedural steps, time limits, and enforceability of adjudication determinations. The key statutory features include the requirement for a written notice of adjudication, a 28‑day determination period (extendable by agreement), and the binding nature of the decision until the dispute is finally resolved. The statute also provides for the appointment of an adjudicator by an authorised nominating body. Understanding the statutory requirements is essential for ensuring that an adjudication is valid and enforceable.

Contractual adjudication clause is a provision within the construction contract that adopts the statutory adjudication scheme or provides an alternative adjudication mechanism. The clause will specify the procedure for appointing an adjudicator, the timeframes for submissions, and the effect of the determination. Parties may tailor the clause to suit their needs, for example by extending the determination period or by allowing for a joint adjudicator. However, any variation from the statutory scheme must not contravene the minimum protections afforded by the Construction Act, such as the right to a rapid determination.

Adjudication hearing is the meeting, usually conducted in person or via video conference, where the parties present their case to the adjudicator. The hearing is informal, with limited procedural rules, and the adjudicator may intervene to focus the discussion on the key issues. Evidence may be presented through documents, expert reports, and oral testimony. The hearing is typically short—often a single day—reflecting the need for a swift determination. The adjudicator may reserve judgment or give an immediate decision, depending on the complexity of the case.

Adjudication costs are the fees payable to the adjudicator, as well as any administrative charges incurred during the process. The costs are generally apportioned between the parties, with the losing party bearing a larger share. The adjudicator may order costs based on the parties’ conduct, the reasonableness of submissions, and the amount in dispute. Parties should be mindful of the cost implications when deciding whether to pursue adjudication, particularly in low‑value disputes where the cost may outweigh the benefit.

Adjudication appeal is an extremely limited right to challenge an adjudication determination. Under the Construction Act, an adjudication decision can only be appealed on narrow grounds, such as serious procedural irregularity, bias, or the adjudicator exceeding jurisdiction. The appeal is made to the court, and the court may set aside the determination and remit the matter for a fresh adjudication. Because the grounds for appeal are limited, parties generally accept the adjudication result and move on to arbitration or litigation for a final resolution.

Adjudication challenge is similar to an appeal, but may also include a request for the adjudicator to reconsider the decision on the basis of new evidence or a mistake of fact. The adjudicator may agree to reconsider if the parties consent, but the statutory scheme does not provide a formal mechanism for reconsideration. In practice, parties may negotiate a settlement after an adjudication determination, acknowledging that the adjudication has provided a benchmark for the dispute.

Adjudication review is an internal process within an adjudication body where the decision is examined for compliance with procedural rules. Some adjudication panels have a review panel that can assess whether the adjudicator complied with the statutory timeframe and whether the decision was properly documented. The review does not alter the substantive outcome but may identify procedural defects that could form the basis of a court challenge.

Adjudicative jurisdiction refers to the authority of the adjudicator to hear a particular type of dispute. The adjudicator’s jurisdiction is conferred by the contract and the statutory scheme. A dispute may fall outside the adjudicator’s jurisdiction if it involves matters not covered by the contract, such as issues of fraud or criminal conduct. Parties must ensure that the dispute falls within the adjudicator’s jurisdiction to avoid a futile adjudication.

Adjudicative authority is the power granted to the adjudicator to make determinations on the matters before them. This includes the authority to order payment, award interest, and allocate costs. The authority is derived from the contract clause and the statutory framework. In some cases, the adjudicator may be granted additional powers, such as the ability to appoint experts or to order interim measures.

Adjudicative award is another term for the adjudication determination, emphasizing its status as an award that must be complied with. The award is enforceable as a judgment, and parties who fail to comply may be subject to enforcement action. The award may also include a schedule of costs, interest, and any other relief deemed appropriate.

Adjudicative timeframes are the prescribed periods within which each step of the adjudication process must be completed. The key timeframe is the 28‑day period for the adjudicator to issue a determination, which can be extended by agreement of the parties. Other timeframes include the period for serving the notice of adjudication (typically within six months of the dispute) and the period for the respondent to submit a response (usually seven days). Failure to adhere to these timeframes can result in procedural penalties, including dismissal of the claim.

Adjudicative procedural steps encompass the sequence of actions required to conduct adjudication: (1) Notice of adjudication, (2) appointment of adjudicator, (3) submission of statements of case, (4) disclosure of documents, (5) hearing (if any), (6) determination, and (7) enforcement. Each step has specific requirements, and non‑compliance can jeopardise the validity of the adjudication. Parties must manage these steps carefully to preserve their rights.

Adjudicative evidence is the material submitted to support a party’s case, including contracts, invoices, correspondence, expert reports, and photographs. The adjudicator is not bound by strict rules of evidence, but the evidence must be relevant, admissible, and sufficient to justify the determination. Parties should focus on the most persuasive evidence, as the adjudicator’s time is limited. Over‑loading the adjudicator with excessive documentation can backfire, leading to a superficial assessment.

Adjudicative hearing (see earlier) may be conducted in person, by telephone, or via video link. The hearing is informal, and the adjudicator may intervene to keep the discussion focused. The parties present their case, answer questions, and may be cross‑examined on key points. The hearing is designed to be efficient, with the adjudicator often delivering the award on the same day.

Adjudicative award notice is the formal document issued by the adjudicator confirming the decision, the amount payable, interest, and costs. The notice must be signed and dated, and it becomes the operative instrument for enforcement. Parties should retain a copy of the award notice for their records and for any subsequent enforcement action.

Adjudicative enforcement (see earlier) involves converting the award into a judgment and taking steps such as obtaining a charging order against property, a writ of control to seize assets, or a garnishment of bank accounts. Enforcement can be straightforward when the losing party has sufficient assets, but may be complex if the party is insolvent or located abroad.