Innovative Thinker | Andy Batty
Tool to trust
As adjudication marks its 25th anniversary, Andrew Batty talks about what the sector has learned so far. Claire Smith reports.
Adjudication as a dispute resolution method was first used by the UK construction industry in 1998 and the benefits are being recognised globally with it now being adopted by other countries.
Many still look to the UK for case histories to see how to get the best from the approach and learn about how it has evolved and matured over the last 25 years.
Batty: There is much to be learned from analysing past adjudications
Law firm Pinsent Masons is aiming to deliver even better understanding and has so far analysed the outcomes of 300 cases it has worked on to create a data insight tool. According to Pinsent Masons legal director Andrew Batty, the tool’s main aim is to benefit the firm’s clients, but he believes it is also useful in resolving the first hurdle of adjudication – getting both parties to agree on the adjudicator.
Adjudication is a process designed for businesses to resolve construction contract disputes much more quickly and cost-effectively than through arbitration or litigation. The outcome of the process is decided by an adjudicator, so – for both parties – having the right adjudicator is key to getting a fast and fair decision.
Batty says the tool provides quantitative rather than qualitative data about the type of issues an adjudicator has managed previously and how they tend to determine cases.
“We always had the information that the tool gives, but in the past, when it came to getting insight into a particular adjudicator, we were reliant on asking around within the firm for details on an adjudicator’s experience and decision making,” explains Batty.
“The responses we got were always subjective though.”
Batty says the ability to review adjudicators based on claim type and past decisions has been “game changing”. He says it has also helped speed up the process and has given clients more confidence when selecting the adjudicators.
“The data also gives guidance on the length of the process and likely cost for a particular adjudicator and claim typeHe adds: “The data also gives guidance on the length of the process and likely cost for a particular adjudicator and claim type, so we know whether it might be better to make an offer to the other party rather than defend the case, or whether we should push for an alternative route to resolution. Essentially, it aids with risk management.”
While the aim of the tool was to support Pinsent Masons’ own clients, it has proved useful in reaching an agreement on the adjudicator with the other party involved too.
Batty believes that continuing to add data to the tool will improve the assessment of adjudicators further and he is also looking to widen the scope of the data gathered. As well as looking to expand the analysis to other countries where adjudication is used in construction, such as South Africa and Australia, Batty is aiming to add other data to the tool.
This will give detail on “more types of delay claim cases and how those tend to get resolved”.