MoneyBestPal Team
A legal process that involves the resolution of disputes between parties by a neutral third party, called an adjudicator.

Adjudication is a legal process that involves the resolution of disputes between parties by a neutral third party, called an adjudicator. Unless the parties agree differently or file an appeal with a higher authority, the adjudicator's decision is normally final and binding on the parties.

There are different types of adjudication, depending on the nature of the dispute and the applicable law. Some examples are:
  • Statutory adjudication: This type of adjudication is required by law, such as the UK's 1996 Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act, which paves the way for a quick and affordable way to settle disputes in the construction sector.
  • Contractual adjudication: This is a form of adjudication that is agreed by the parties in their contract, as an alternative to litigation or arbitration. The technique and requirements for appointing an adjudicator are outlined in an adjudication scheme or guidelines, which the parties may use to make their own adjudicator selections.
  • Judicial adjudication: This type of adjudication takes place in a court of law, where a judge or jury renders a verdict based on the facts and defenses put up by the parties. Although judicial adjudication is frequently the most conclusive and reliable method of settling conflicts, it may also be expensive and time-consuming.

The advantages of adjudication include:
  • Speed: Adjudication can be finished quickly, often within 28 days following the dispute's referral to the adjudicator. By doing this, it may be possible to prevent delays and interruptions in the completion of contracts or projects.
  • Cost: Due to the lack of formalities and procedures, adjudication is often less expensive than litigation or arbitration. Additionally, the parties may decide to split the adjudicator's fees or allocate payment based on how the dispute is resolved.
  • Flexibility: As the parties can appoint their own adjudicator or agree on the parameters, guidelines, and standards for the adjudication process, adjudication can be customized to the needs and preferences of the parties.
  • Finality: Unless the parties agree differently or make an appeal to a higher authority, adjudication can offer a definitive and binding settlement of disputes. By doing this, additional disagreements and legal action may be avoided.

The disadvantages of adjudication include:
  • Quality: A fair and accurate conclusion may not always be reached through adjudication because the adjudicator may not have the time or resources to take into account all the pertinent information. Also, it's possible that the adjudicator lacks the knowledge or objectivity necessary to handle tricky or technical problems.
  • Enforcement: As the parties may choose to disregard the judgment or contest it in court, adjudication may not always be enforceable. The jurisdiction and legal system where the dispute arises may also affect whether adjudication rulings are enforced.
  • Precedent: Due to the fact that each case is judged on its own merits and particulars, adjudication may not set a precedent that will apply to subsequent conflicts. Also, there is a chance that the adjudicator's verdict won't be published or reported, which restricts its usability and openness.