Proposal for a "dual scheme" model of statutory adjudication for the Australian building and construction industry

Brand, M C and Davenport, P (2011) Proposal for a "dual scheme" model of statutory adjudication for the Australian building and construction industry. International Journal of Law in the Built Environment, 3(3), pp. 252-268. ISSN 1756-1450

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to outline a proposal for a Dual Scheme model of statutory adjudication for the Australian building and construction industry. Design/methodology/approach – The paper deals with the security of payment problem in the Australian construction industry and the legislative response to that problem in New South Wales and elsewhere more generally. The paper highlights deficiencies in current adjudication schemes in Australia and proposes a revised methodology of adjudication by means of the proposed Dual Scheme model. The Dual Scheme is explained in detail and examples are given showing how the Dual Scheme would work in practice. Findings – The Dual Scheme of adjudication allows for adjudication of “progress claims” (just as they are adjudicated now under the “Defined Scheme”), but also provides for separately adjudicated “money claims” in a similar way to that done under the “Non-specific Scheme”. Both parties to a construction contract can take advantage of adjudication under a Non-specific Scheme whilst simultaneously maintaining the relative time and cost benefits of the Defined Scheme in dealing with progress payment claims. Implementation of the proposed Dual Scheme would require new legislation. Originality/value – The Dual Scheme is not a proposal to merely amalgamate two existing models of adjudication in Australia. Rather, it is a Dual Scheme incorporating the philosophy of two disparate systems of adjudication framed in a companionable form. It is hoped that the Dual Scheme may act as a common starting point for eventual agreement between the various interested groups as to what a national scheme of statutory adjudication in Australia will resemble in the future. The Dual Scheme proposal may be of interest in other jurisdictions where statutory adjudication for the construction industry has been introduced or is being contemplated.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: adjudication; Australia; dual scheme; harmonization; legislation; security of payment
Index terms: Australia, adjudication, statutory adjudication, implementation, security of payment, construction industry, construction contract, philosophy, jurisdiction, proposal, legislation, New South Wales, methodology
Subjects: industry analysis, philosophical studies, warranties, Geography, research methods, legal systems, project planning, contractual arrangements, dispute resolution, contract type
Topics: Procurement, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Contract Administration, Legal Issues
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here