All questions

Introduction

Statutory adjudication has come to dominate the UK construction disputes landscape. After a period of recession in the early 1990s, the UK construction market adopted the concept of mandatory (or statutory) adjudication, which was transposed into law through the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (the Construction Act) and has been supplemented by the Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998 (the Scheme). The right to adjudicate is often included as an express provision in construction contracts but, if not expressly stated, then the right is implied under the Scheme. The Construction Act and the Scheme provide the legislative framework both for the right to adjudication and for payment protections in construction contracts.

Statutory adjudication has undoubtedly encouraged a swifter and more economic method of resolving construction disputes. It has also, in conjunction with the application of payment protection provisions,1 proven effective at improving cash flow in the construction supply chain. The process is not, however, without perceived faults. See, for example, '2022 Construction Adjudication in the United Kingdom: Tracing Trends and Guiding Reform', which looked at how statutory adjudication operates in the United Kingdom.2 A further update from King’s College London published in November 20243 found that a record number of referrals (over 2,200) were made to adjudication panels in the reporting period – a tribute to the success of adjudication as a growing form of construction dispute resolution. Other key findings include:

  1. The leading causes of disputes in recent construction adjudications were inadequate contract administration and lack of competence of contract participants.
  2. The most common category of claim in 2024, was ‘smash and grab’ adjudications, followed by final accounts, interim payments, and loss and expense and/or damages for delay and/or disruption.
  3. The level of party compliance with adjudication decisions was high, with 52 per cent of questionnaire respondents stating that, in the past year, not a single adjudicated dispute was referred to arbitration or litigation.