Sean Brannigan QC & Elspeth Owens look closely at who pays fees & costs in adjudications
* * * * * *
Parties responding to adjudications commenced under the Housing Grants and Regeneration Act 1996 often take objections relating to jurisdiction, and proceed with their response to those adjudications “without prejudice” to those fundamental objections.
That often poses the following real difficulty for adjudicators: if those jurisdictional objections are found to be valid, and the party commencing the adjudication is unable to meet any liability for costs, how will the adjudicator be paid?
From the perspective of the party taking a valid jurisdictional objection, being forced to pay such fees is obviously somewhat unpalatable. Similarly, however, from the perspective of the adjudicator, uncertainty as to whether any claim for fees against a responding party would be enforceable introduces a highly unwelcome degree of uncertainty, particularly in time-heavy and intensive adjudications, where the fees “at stake” might be very large.
Jurisdictional objection
Prior to February, the position appeared to turn upon