You are not logged in.
Openly accessible

Examining the approaches to diminish judicial intervention in statutory adjudication in Australia

Skaik, S., Coggins, J. and Mills, A. 2016, Examining the approaches to diminish judicial intervention in statutory adjudication in Australia, in AUBEA 2016 : Proceedings of the 40th Australasian Universities Building Education Association Annual Conference, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Qld., pp. 660-670.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
skaik-examiningthe-2016.pdf Published version application/pdf 395.70KB 63

Title Examining the approaches to diminish judicial intervention in statutory adjudication in Australia
Author(s) Skaik, S.ORCID iD for Skaik, S. orcid.org/0000-0003-1047-3058
Coggins, J.
Mills, A.ORCID iD for Mills, A. orcid.org/0000-0002-2223-1550
Conference name Australasian Universities Building Education Association. Annual Conference (40th : 2016 : Cairns, Queensland)
Conference location Cairns, Queensland
Conference dates 6-8 Jul. 2016
Title of proceedings AUBEA 2016 : Proceedings of the 40th Australasian Universities Building Education Association Annual Conference
Editor(s) Singhaputtangkul, Natee
Publication date 2016
Conference series Annual Conference of the Australasian Universities Building Education Association
Start page 660
End page 670
Total pages 11
Publisher Central Queensland University
Place of publication Rockhampton, Qld.
Keyword(s) judicial review
remittal
review mechanism
statutory adjudication
severance
Summary In Australia, statutory construction adjudication is a fast payment dispute resolution process designed to keep the cash flowing down the hierarchical contractual chain in construction projects. Its rapid, highly regulatory and temporarily binding nature have led to it being often described as a ‘quick and dirty’ process that delivers ‘rough and ready’ justice. Adjudicators often have to grapple with complex legal issues related to jurisdictional facts and interpretation of contract provisions, though the majority of them are not legally trained. This has often led to a poor quality of adjudication outcome for large and complex payment claims which has, in turn, led to a mounting dissatisfaction due to the many judicial challenges to adjudicators’ determinations seen in recent years. The evolving tension between the object of the security of payment legislation and excessive involvement of the courts has often been the subject of comment by the judiciary. This paper aims to examine the legislative and judicial approaches to support the object of the security of payment legislation to ease cash flow. The paper adopts a desktop study approach whereby evidence is gathered from three primary sources – judicial decisions, academic publications and governmental reports. The paper concludes that there is a need to adopt other measures which can provide more convenient relief to aggrieved parties to an adjudication process, such that the adjudication process is kept away from the courts as far as is possible. Specifically, it is proposed that a well-designed expanded legislative review scheme of allegedly flawed adjudication, based on that provided in the Western Australian legislation, might stand as a promising remedy to eliminate the evolving tension.
ISBN 9781921047138
Language eng
Field of Research 180123 Litigation, Adjudication and Dispute Resolution
120299 Building not elsewhere classified
Socio Economic Objective 940405 Law Reform
HERDC Research category E1 Full written paper - refereed
ERA Research output type E Conference publication
Copyright notice ©2016, The Authors
Free to Read? Yes
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30085255

Document type: Conference Paper
Collections: School of Architecture and Built Environment
Open Access Collection
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 77 Abstract Views, 57 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Thu, 18 Aug 2016, 13:25:17 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.