Early perceptions of allowing adjudication of oral contracts

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to consider the implications of the admission of oral contracts to statutory adjudication proceedings. A major criticism of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (“HGCRA 1996”) was that Section 107 required contracts to be “in writing” for the parties to be able to use statutory adjudication. In response, the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 repealed Section 107 of the HGCRA 1996. This paper considers the implications of the admission of oral contracts to statutory adjudication proceedings, whereby adjudicators' may now have to determine the exact nature of oral agreements. The critical literature review has highlighted that there is a perceived risk that, by allowing oral contracts to be decided through adjudication, there could be an increased risk of injustice (as the adjudicator may have to decide oral testimony about contract formation). Adjudicators may now have to determine the exact nature of oral agreements. The critical literature review has highlighted that there is a perceived risk that by allowing oral contracts to be decided through adjudication there could be an increased risk of injustice (as the adjudicator may have to decide oral testimony about contract formation). Design/methodology/approach – The questionnaire responses of 38 construction industry professionals were analysed by identifying facts and salient themes. The research aims to identify to what extent the changes have widened the scope for entering into adjudication proceedings and whether there is an increased risk of injustice due to the short timescales involved. Findings – There was significant agreement that parties to an oral agreement have an increased risk of injustice through wrong interpretation of the terms and significant disagreement that allowing oral contracts to be referred to adjudication will encourage the use of oral agreements. In addition, construction industry professionals were interviewed in the Midlands, UK, to obtain their opinions, views and perceptions of the admission of oral contracts to statutory adjudication. Originality/value – The research is anticipated to be of particular benefit to parties considering referring an oral contract to adjudication.