Construction Industry

By Samer Skaik

I am delighted to see my article entitled “The tip of the iceberg: Jurisdiction of statutory adjudicators” published this month in Construction Law Journal under Construction Act Review Section. This is the second time I got an article published in this section. A third article is also in the pipeline for the next edition.

This is the brief as quoted from the Editorial introduction:

Samer Skaik discusses the jurisdictional limits of statutory adjudicators in both the UK and New South Wales adjudication models, focusing on challenges relating to the validity of the adjudicator’s appointment. The author identifies the trend of the Australian courts in particular to allow adjudicators to provisionally determine their own jurisdiction rather than encouraging pre-emptive applications by the parties. He considers this approach problematic, in part because adjudicators may not be legally trained, but also as giving rise to other difficulties and inconsistencies that in his view undermine the intention of the legislation. The author concludes by proposing a “roadmap” to regulate adjudicators’ jurisdiction, to assist with navigating around the difficulties and deficiencies that he identifies.

To read the full article, please click here

…

The tip of the iceberg: Jurisdiction of statutory adjudicatorsRead More »

By Samer Skaik

Statutory adjudication has been enacted progressively throughout Australia on a state-by-state basis over a period of 10 years starting in 1999. The first Australian jurisdiction to introduce statutory adjudication was New South Wales (NSW) by virtue of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999. Despite the many differences between all of the Acts in Australia, they can be broadly grouped on the basis of similarity into the East Coast model Acts (including New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria, South Australia, Tasmania and Australian Capital Territory)[1] and the West Coast model Acts (including Northern Territory and Western Australia).[2] The East Coast model Acts were modelled after the original NSW Act and provide, in addition to an adjudication scheme, for a highly regulatory statutory payment scheme which runs alongside the contractual payment scheme. The West Coast model Acts are more akin to the UK Act, affording primacy to the contractual payment scheme. The common objective of all the legislation is to facilitate timely cash flow within the construction contractual chains. …

Does Statutory Adjudication fall short in dealing with complex claims in Australia?Read More »

by Laura Warren and Alexa Hall

Site condition risk is not static. All too often, during the course of construction, contractors encounter subsurface conditions that differ from those set out in information provided by its employer or anticipated in their bids, or come across unforeseeable or undetected site conditions in the field. Such discoveries can cause schedule delays, cost increases and dangerous working, invalidate design assumptions and ultimately pave the way to litigation. One size does not fit all and the site condition risk is unique for each and every project. In the context of site risks, there is no substitute for signing a clear contract which, where possible, identifies such risks, and particularises precisely what the parties should do if they eventuate. …

Unforeseen Ground Conditions In Qatar And Risk MitigationRead More »

Find out next month at their 2^nd annual Africa Contract Users’ conference.

This official FIDIC event is designed specifically for contract users in Africa and will explore the must-know areas of FIDIC such as claims, risk allocation, dispute resolution and much more besides.

You’ll also get the inside track on the latest contract changes and amendments that are due to come out in early 2017 – presented to you by the very people responsible for implementing these changes! …

What is FIDIC’s latest advice for Africa?Read More »