Welcome to Joem's Blog
|
|
 Only recently, I wrote about adjudicators’ jurisdiction under the Construction Contracts Act 2002, and in particular whether an adjudicator’s jurisdiction is limited to the notice of adjudication. The key point in that discussion was that the notice remains important, but it does not necessarily provide the complete jurisdictional map. The better approach is to identify the real dispute properly referred under the statutory process as a whole, while remaining alert to the limits imposed by natural justice and procedural fairness.
The recent English TCC decision in Premier Modular Ltd v Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust [2026] EWHC 1404 (TCC) provides a useful companion to that discussion. Although it arises under the English adjudication regime and an NEC4 contract, the principle is highly relevant to adjudication practice more generally: an adjudicator may analyse the dispute robustly and is not confined to simply choosing between the parties’ submissions, but must not decide the case on a materially different and decisive basis without giving the parties a fair opportunity to respond. In that sense, Premier Modular is not merely a case about NEC compensation events or Accepted Programmes. It is a case about the boundary between legitimate adjudicative reasoning and procedural unfairness. It illustrates that a broad notice of adjudication may answer a jurisdictional objection, but it will not necessarily cure a natural justice problem if the decision ultimately turns on a case that neither party actually had the opportunity to address.
0 Comments
 One of the more persistent questions under the Construction Contracts Act 2002 is whether an adjudicator’s jurisdiction is fixed by the notice of adjudication, or whether the adjudication claim and the issues actually put in dispute shape the adjudicator’s mandate more fully.
 Receiving an adjudicator’s determination is a major milestone — but it’s not the finish line. In many cases, the real challenge begins after the decision is issued: ensuring the losing party actually pays or complies.
Under the Construction Contracts Act 2002 (CCA), adjudication is designed to be fast, binding, and practical. But when compliance doesn’t happen voluntarily, the Act provides a clear enforcement pathway to turn a paper decision into actual recovery.  Once the adjudicator has received all submissions and completed any meetings or site visits, the process moves to its most significant stage — the Determination. For many parties, this is the moment where uncertainty turns into clarity. But understanding what the determination actually means, and what must happen afterward, is critical to navigating the final phase of the Construction Contracts Act 2002 (CCA).
 Once the Notice of Adjudication has been served and an adjudicator appointed, the process formally begins. What happens next is a tightly structured yet flexible procedure designed to deliver a fair, enforceable decision—usually within 25 to 35 working days.
 Once a dispute has crystallised, the next step is to start adjudication properly. This begins with a single but crucial document — the Notice of Adjudication. Getting it right sets the tone for the entire process; getting it wrong can derail the claim before it begins.
 Disputes are an inevitable part of construction. Tight timeframes, evolving designs, and payment pressure mean disagreements can quickly arise. Fortunately, New Zealand’s Construction Contracts Act 2002 (CCA) provides a clear and powerful tool to resolve them — adjudication.
Blog Series: Understanding Adjudication in New Zealand under the Construction Contracts Act 20026/10/2025  Disputes are part of construction life — but how they’re resolved can make all the difference.
The Construction Contracts Act 2002 (CCA) gives every party in a construction contract a statutory right to adjudication— a fast-track process designed to keep cash flowing and projects moving. As a Chartered and Registered Quantity Surveyor and practising Adjudicator, I’ve seen how powerful (and misunderstood) this process can be. This five-part series explains adjudication step-by-step — from the first notice to enforcement — offering both clarity and practical insight. The Series The Right to Adjudicate — Your fast-track path to resolving construction disputes How to Start an Adjudication — The importance of getting the Notice right Inside the Adjudication Room — How the process actually works The Adjudicator’s Determination — What it means and what comes next From Decision to Dollars — Enforcing adjudicator’s determinations in court Whether you’re a contractor, consultant, or principal, understanding each stage helps you manage disputes with confidence — and compliance. From Conflict to Clarity: The Power of Dispute Resolution Clauses in Construction Contracts23/9/2025  Every construction project begins with excitement—the vision of a new home, a refurbished office, or a large-scale development. But behind that excitement lies a reality I’ve seen many times over nearly two decades in this industry: projects succeed not just because of good design and strong teams, but because of solid contracts.
In my work as a Chartered Quantity Surveyor and dispute resolution practitioner, I’ve come across contracts that were little more than handshakes on paper. Inevitably, those projects ran into trouble. On the other hand, where the contract was carefully drafted—with clear scope, timelines, payment terms, and especially a dispute resolution clause—the project was far more likely to stay on track, even when challenges arose.  It’s a quiet Saturday afternoon. The cranes stand still, the excavators are parked, and most of the crew have gone home to their families. Yet, behind the scenes, the project doesn’t really sleep. An email pings into a company’s inbox—a payment claim. Nobody reads it that day. Nobody even sees it until Monday morning.
For many contractors, subcontractors, and clients, that scenario feels harmless. But in the world of construction law, timing is everything. The moment that email landed, the statutory clock had already started ticking. By the time the office opened again, precious days had already been lost. |
AuthorJoem is a Dispute Resolution Practitioner, Construction Law specialist and a practicing Quantity Surveyor with a strong background in Civil Engineering and Project Management. Archives
June 2026
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed
