{"id":48613,"date":"2018-11-05T09:14:35","date_gmt":"2018-11-05T09:14:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.pbctoday.co.uk\/news\/?p=48613"},"modified":"2021-05-06T11:59:40","modified_gmt":"2021-05-06T10:59:40","slug":"construction-disputes-mediate-adjudicate","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.pbctoday.co.uk\/news\/planning-construction-news\/construction-disputes-mediate-adjudicate\/48613\/","title":{"rendered":"Construction Disputes – to Mediate or Adjudicate?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Peter Vinden,\u00a0Chief Executive of The Vinden Partnership discusses mediation as a method to resolve construction disputes<\/h2>\n

I was recently invited by the Association of Northern Mediators (\u201cANM\u201d) to participate in a debate hosted by my colleagues at Eversheds<\/a> Sutherland\u2019s Manchester office. I am not quite sure how it happened but I found myself speaking up for the benefits of adjudication and Mark Mattison, my friend and colleague, spoke about the features and benefits of mediation. Which process was preferred by the audience? Read this article to find out or simply skip to the end.<\/p>\n

Adjudication<\/u><\/h3>\n

I issued my first adjudicator\u2019s decision in 1999 which is coincidentally when I trained as a mediator with CEDR. I don\u2019t really want to think too long about the quality of that decision. It was the right decision but the form and content of it could, admittedly and with the benefit of hindsight, have been better. In those days the first pioneering adjudicator<\/a>s were feeling their way and getting to grips with this new concept of dispute resolution so I have forgiven myself, even if the parties involved haven\u2019t!<\/p>\n

Can you remember what resolving construction<\/a> disputes was like prior to 1 May 1998, the effective birthday of adjudication? The introduction of statutory adjudication was the equivalent of the industry being hit by a tidal wave, at least in how, as an industry, we went about resolving construction disputes. Adjudication was supposed to provide a dispute-riddled construction industry with a low cost, simple process for all parties, regardless of size, to access and obtain swift justice that had previously been denied to them.<\/p>\n

Whether the government of that time really envisaged that adjudication would evolve to such an extent that it is now routinely the tribunal of choice to resolve large-value, complex disputes, I do not know. I suspect not. There is, however, no doubt that the concept of adjudication has been embraced by the construction industry and, more importantly, supported by the courts.<\/p>\n

We know that adjudicator\u2019s decisions are routinely enforced by the courts. There are obvious exceptions to this, such as;<\/p>\n