Dispute Resolution in United Kingdom-Free-Samples for Students

Question: Discuss about the Dispute Resolution in United Kingdom. Answer: Adjudication was necessary because it is considered as a swift and inexpensive process of resolving a dispute. Since time immemorial, the process of adjudication was used to solve disputes between parties as it proved to be less expensive than other processes of dispute resolution. Process of adjudication has been considered to be an alternative process of dispute resolution especially in cases of Construction Contracts. In this regard, it is noteworthy to mention here that the process of adjudication which was involved was swift and straightforward however certain obligations were observed. The dispute procedures in the contract should have been clearly stated by the parties to dispute at the beginning of the project which would generally include an agreed approach regarding the decisions of adjudication that will be binding upon them. However, in this regard, after making decisions involving adjudication, consideration has to be made by the parties regarding the nature of the decis ion as when it will be binding on each party. The party in whose favor the decision has been granted should particularly consider that whether the proceedings of the Court are essential in order to protect the outcomes of adjudication. However, the decision of the adjudicator can also be binding upon the parties in order to add conclusiveness to the decision provided. Some unexpected difficulties and potential issues have been observed in the interpretation of the Act. It is required on the part of the parties to dispute to address the issues that have been identified instead of going through lengthy court proceedings for further clarification which are generally expensive. In this regard, the difficulties can be addressed however, it is important to identify the issues related with it. The most important issue that has been identified is regarding the nominations of the panel which is of utmost importance. In this regard, it is noteworthy to mention here that if such unexpected difficulties and potential problems has not been identified and rectified at the same time, then the application of the process of adjudication shall be unenforceable. Therefore, in case of proceedings involving unsuccessful enforcement the parties in success is bound the pay the costs incurred in such process. In this regard clarification shall be required in cases where collateral warranties and bonds can be considered as construction contracts. In this regard, clarification is also included in the provisions that are required to deal with the parties to dispute. In some cases adjudications may be disregarded in order to facilitate smooth and efficient working of the process. Therefore, it is important to identify the problems timely and raise issues however, it is essential to act reasonable while agreeing timetables. It is crucial on the part of the referring parties to correct any kind of jurisdictional issues immediately after it has been identified. There is no point of getting into unnecessary proceedings for the purpose of receiving potentially unenforceable decision. In this regard, the jurisdictional challenges shall be considered by the respondent however appropriate decision is required whether such dispute can be resolved through adjudication or not. Bibliography: Woolley, Alice. "The Lawyer as Advisor and the Practice of the Rule of Law."UBCL Rev.47 (2014): 743. Le, Yun, et al. "Overview of corruption research in construction."Journal of management in engineering30.4 (2014): 02514001.