|











This article appeared
in Building magazine
on 4 April 2008
|

Dough well spent
If writing a bad review of a pizza restaurant can
land you in court, just think what writing a review of a book by
a leading construction judge does to the old ticker. Luckily,
it’s a fabulous book – no, really
“All clients, builders and subcontractors
are open at a moment’s notice to be required to adjudicate any
dispute. Once the other party requires you to dance, you must
dance”
Now then, Bingham, you’ll have to watch your
ps and qs when writing this piece. Why? Because I am about to
review a book. It’s written by one of the leading construction
industry judges: Mr Justice Coulson. And, well, we don’t want to
upset him, do we? I wouldn’t like to end up like the journalist
who reviewed a pizza restaurant for The Irish Times and ended up
being taken to court. “The review,” said the court, “did not
commend the restaurant’s ambience. It did not praise the food.
It did not compliment the service. It was not a flattering
review.” A jury walloped the newspaper for £25,000 damages. But,
last month, the Court of Appeal ordered a retrial, claiming that
the jury that decided that the restaurant had been defamed had
been misdirected by the trial judge.
And so to the book –
Construction Adjudication, £145, Oxford University Press. It
is ever so, ever so good. Phew! And I promise you this: if it
was ever so bad or even a bit bad, I would tell you. But out of
courtesy, I would have told the judge first. And then, out of
grief at the news he and I would open a pizza parlour to make
ends meet. Already, before the ink had even dried, I had the
book quoted to me in two adjudications. “Look what the learned
judge says in his learned book about …” and then learned
thoughts were put before me. And what did I do about all that?
Easy, I asked the other side if they agreed with the book. Guess
what? They explained (it’s called “distinguishing”) how the
facts of my case differed and the book didn’t apply. Ah, yes,
that’s the lawyer’s art at work.
You can’t take part in the business of
adjudication in building construction cases without this book.
By “take part”, I mean something quite big. As soon as you
become a constructor of a building in the UK you have agreed,
however unwittingly, to adjudication by way of an act of
parliament. That means all architects, engineers, quantity
surveyors, project managers, consultants, as well as all
clients, builders and subcontractors, are open at a moment’s
notice to be required to adjudicate any dispute. Once the other
party requires you to dance, you must dance. You can’t say no to
adjudication.
It’s not all that long ago that Judge Coulson
(now promoted to Mr Justice Coulson) was a barrister arguing
cases for parties in adjudication. So he has seen the working
side of the system. Now his day job includes deciding whether to
enforce adjudicators’ decisions. So his book has real authority
and experience. It is written, as you might expect, by reference
to what previous cases have decided. So, a proposition or
conundrum is discussed by reference to what the judges in the
High Court and Court of Appeal and House of Lords have had to
say. The author, thankfully, hasn’t held back on expressing a
view on the views of others. Anyone appearing in front of him in
an enforcement matter would be well advised to mug up on his
book. Better still, read it before you begin any enforcement
proceedings or before you reject an adjudicator’s binding
decision.
A different forum for disputes is mediation.
A first-class mediator, David Richbell, has written
Mediation of Construction Disputes (£44.50, Blackwell). The
author, I confess, is a favourite of mine. Being a one-time QS,
he understands how the construction industry operates. He was in
at the beginning of mediation in its modern form in 1990. The
book shows us how he manages mediation. It is a useful insight.
Important for knowing how a neutral third party sees his role
and how he sees each party’s role. The process is explained in
four stages: preparing, presenting, negotiating and concluding.
The theme is simply summed up when the author says his job is to
“give the parties their best shot at doing a deal”.
Mediation has developed strands and differing
ideas over the years on “getting to yes”. There is no one system
that always works. Let’s hear more from other mediators on their
system, or shall we just do it as we see best on the day?
Readers are invited to forward recent
judgments for reporting in this column (with full
acknowledgement) to: Tony Bingham, 3 Paper Buildings, Temple,
London EC4Y 7EU. DX: 37164 Biggleswade
Top
|