Justice must be seen to be done

Simon tolson 2017 bw

Simon Tolson explains how the updated provisions in TeCSA’s adjudication service improve transparency and impartiality

As many readers know, the Technology and Construction Solicitors’ Association (TeCSA) is a pre-eminent specialist body of solicitors representing those that practice in the construction and energy areas of the law. It has also for the last 20 years been a highly regarded adjudication nominating body (ANB) with a true multi-disciplinary panel of adjudicators.

TeCSA’s Adjudication Rules for construction disputes are a popular choice, for two reasons. First, they are radical about trying to ensure the dispute is actually resolved, notwithstanding the short time limits laid down by the Construction Act. Second, its rules do more than most to ensure the enforceability of adjudication decisions in practice. 

The rules make clear the underlying purpose of the adjudication is to decide disputes as rapidly and economically as is reasonably possible. In terms of making decisions as for enforceable as possible, Rule 12 gives the adjudicator the power to decide his or her own substantive jurisdiction. Without such a provision, which is still fairly unusual, the adjudicator would not be empowered to make a binding decision.

This is premium content

Only logged in subscribers have access to it.

Login or Subscribe to view this story

Existing subscriber? LOGIN OR

Take out a Premium or Digital subscription and you will get immediate access to:

  • Breaking industry news as it happens
  • Expert analysis and comment from industry leaders
  • Unlimited access to all stories, including premium content
  • Full access to all our online archive

Get access to premium content subscribe today

Alternatively REGISTER for free access on selected stories and sign up for email alerts.