Last month I wrote about parties subsequently appointing an adjudicator as their expert, and the potential for the adjudicator/expert to be, or appear to be, biased. It was interesting that the post attracted two comments, with each one putting one side of the argument in a situation where the adjudicator was subsequently invited to act as a solicitor for one of the parties.  

That got me thinking about situations where the adjudicator is appointed multiple times, either by the same parties on one project, or by one party on different projects.

(more…)

It isn’t often that you see quantity surveyors caught up in an adjudication as one of the parties, although they often feature heavily in other respects (as the parties’ experts, representatives or even as the adjudicator). In fact, I am not personally aware of a claim against a quantity surveyor, although I have seen breach of duty claims against other members of the professional team (like engineers and architects). Quantity surveyors do not seem to feature much in court cases either.

I’m not sure any of this means quantity surveyors are perfect, but there must be a reason why they aren’t sued that often. (more…)

Regular readers of my blog (and followers of PLC Construction) may be forgiven for thinking that I have a crystal ball and can see into the future, after writing last week about without prejudice, only for the very same topic to appear in a Coulson J judgment later the same day.

Having discussed without prejudice last week, I will leave that for another day. However, other aspects of Coulson J’s judgment merit attention, particular his words at paragraph 11. (more…)

What happens if, during the adjudication, one party intentionally or accidentally discloses to the adjudicator a settlement offer made by the other party? (more…)