CEDR Solve - Construction Adjudication

content"> Introductiontraditional mediation, as the mediator would be fully
The Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution [CEDR]aware of the issues involved in the dispute and in
was established in 1990, with the aim of providingparticular the specific issues on which the parties
Alternative Dispute Resolution [ADR] techniques andshould focus. Notwithstanding this possible saving in
educating businesses and legal communities in the usemediation costs, the process is still additional to the
of ADR.original adjudication costs incurred by both parties.
CEDR’s dispute resolution service, aptly namedIn addition to the above concerns regarding the
CEDR Solve, is one of the leading independent disputeprocess itself, further questions arise with regards to
resolution services in Europe and has experience ofthe use of CEDR’s rules within the industry.
over 14,000 dispute referrals, the majority of whichCurrently, the Scheme for Construction Contracts is
have involved mediation.applied to all construction contracts that do not contain
As identified on its website, CEDR has beenprovisions for adjudication. With regards to those
“instrumental in bringing mediation into businesscontracts that do contain adjudication provisions,
practice,” especially in raising its profile within theincluding most standard forms, these also tend to refer
construction industry. Its mediation services have anto or at least reflect the Scheme. The resolution
impressive settlement rate of over 70 percent.method selected by parties to settle disputes is often
Although mediation is perceived as being its primarydetermined by the form of contract in use, which may
speciality, CEDR offers a comprehensive range ofprove to be a barrier for the widespread use of
dispute resolution processes and has been a leader inCEDR’s rules.
innovative dispute resolution techniques for nearly twoFinally, once over the difficulties associated with the
decades. In fact, CEDR probably provides every formadoption of CEDR’s rules and the
of ADR technique you are likely to have heard of, andparties’ agreement to their use, would parties
some forms that you probably haven’t heard ofactually be inclined to refer an adjudicated dispute to
— yet. In September 2008, CEDR Solve provedmediation?
innovatory yet again with the launch of its updatedIn the circumstances that a party is reasonably
Rules for Construction Adjudication. Granted,confident with its case and believes that the
adjudication is by no means a new discovery, butadjudication has been successful, why would that
when provisions for the use of mediation are added toparty want to mediate?
the process, it puts a new perspective on a tried andConversely, if a party to an adjudication concludes that
tested method.its argument is not as robust as it might have originally
The Processthought, why would that party want the adjudicator,
CEDR’s Rules for Construction Adjudicationwho is fully aware of the weakness of the case, to
provide for a standard 28-day adjudication inact as mediator?
accordance with the Housing Grants, Construction andIn either case, the temptation to open the envelope
Regeneration Act 1996, with the option to refer theand put an end to the ongoing suffering caused by the
dispute to mediation after the adjudication has takendispute would surely be too much.
place.Advantages
On reaching a decision, the adjudicator may invite theDespite the discernible negativity above, it is not all bad
parties to refer the dispute to mediation. If the partiesnews for the CEDR Solve Rules for Construction
refuse, then it is business as usual and the decision willAdjudication.
be thrust upon the parties. If the parties are receptiveWith regards to the difficulties mentioned above
to the idea, the adjudicator’s decision remainsconcerning the ability of an adjudicator, having reached
sealed and a timetable for mediation is agreed.a decision, then to facilitate a negotiated settlement,
At this stage in the proceedings, the adjudicatorthis is very much dependant on the skill and
miraculously undergoes a transformation from acompetence of the adjudicator/mediator involved in
judgemental, evaluative, decision maker to a facilitative,the process.
creative problem solver. The mediator, formerly knownAs previously discussed, the attributes of an
as the adjudicator, now has 28 days to facilitate aadjudicator and a mediator are very different, each
settlement between the parties.process requiring different techniques, training and
If for any reason a settlement cannot be reachedguidelines in order to be successful.
within 28 days, or either party decides to abandon theAs demanding as this seems, CEDR’s
mediation, the mediator will don his adjudicator’sAdjudication Panel boasts some of the best-known
cap, dust off the envelope containing the adjudicationand most respected adjudicators in the country, who
decision and impose its contents on the parties as ifwould be quite capable of ensuring that each dispute,
the mediation had never happened.having gone through adjudication and which is
If, however, a settlement is reached by the partiessubsequently referred to mediation, is appropriately
during the mediation, the content of the envelopedealt with in order to facilitate the best possible
remains with the adjudicator and the parties remainresolution for each party.
blissfully unaware of his/her decision.Following the comments above concerning the
Disadvantageswidespread use of CEDR’s rules, this remains
On the face of it, the process sounds simple and willspeculative and only time will tell if the process will be
result in the settlement of a dispute, be it temporarilyaccepted by the industry.
binding if imposed by way of the adjudicator’sIf it is accepted, the question of whether a party would
decision or binding if mutually agreed between thebe inclined to refer a dispute that has been through the
parties in the mediation. However, several issues ofadjudication process to mediation still remains. As
concern arise in combining an evaluativedetailed above, the adjudication process has the ability
decision-making process such as adjudication, with ato enlighten parties as to the strengths and
negotiated settlement facilitated by a mediator.weaknesses of their case. On the occasion that a
The first issue is that of the adjudicator/mediator. Theparty becomes confident with its case and believes
role of the independent third party in the two types ofthat the adjudication has been successful, then
dispute resolution procedure is very different.mediation is unlikely to be pursued.
Adjudication has now become a familiar and well usedHowever, it is wrong to assume that every
procedure in the construction industry, in which theadjudication will polarise the parties’
adjudicator draws his/her conclusions and makes aexpectations with such clarity. Granted, an adjudication
decision using predetermined criteria to assess themay highlight the strengths and weaknesses of a
credibility of the parties’ arguments, allocate theparty’s case, but it will also highlight the
burden of proof and/or apply relevant law, rules orstrengths and weaknesses of the opposing
contract conditions to the situation. Simply, the role ofparty’s case. More often than not, the course
an adjudicator is to evaluate the situation and decideof an adjudication will turn some polarised ‘black and
the issues in dispute.white’ opinions into uncertain ‘grey
The role of a mediator, on the other hand, is toareas’. This uncertainty may just be enough to
encourage the parties in dispute to evaluate their ownpersuade parties to an adjudication to keep the
situations and to assist the parties in making their ownenvelope sealed and mediate.
decisions, whilst remaining neutral at all times. This is notIf the mediation succeeds everyone is a winner. The
to be confused with the required neutrality of anparties are hopefully happy with a mutually beneficial
adjudicator, as they too have to remain impartial.solution, with business relationships hopefully repaired
However, when all of the evidence has beenslightly following an adversarial adjudication, and the
assessed and the credibility of the parties’adjudicator/mediator enhances his/her status as a
arguments has been scrutinised, the adjudicator mustdispute resolver.
ultimately side with one of the parties and make aConclusions
decision. The mediator facilitates a decision beingThe CEDR Solve Rules for Construction Adjudication
reached by the parties.are still relatively new, and several questions remain
It is therefore questionable whether an adjudicator,unanswered:
who has undertaken the gruelling process of coming to• Will the rules be used?
a decision based on the facts of a case, can• Would a party refer an adjudicated dispute to
appropriately facilitate communications between themediation?
parties and focus their interests to arrive at a mutually• Is an adjudicator able to mediate the same
beneficial resolution of the dispute.dispute?
Not only does the mediator have to remain impartialOnly time will tell whether the idea can be accepted by
throughout the process, the mediator must refrain fromthe construction industry, and whether mediation
giving away his/her position in relation to the disputefollowing an adjudication can be successful. However,
and the decision gathering dust in its sealed envelope.in certain circumstances, with the correct adjudicator, it
The second issue in relation to the combination of themay just be the best option to put aside the impending
two forms of dispute resolution involves the root ofdecision, attempt to rebuild relationships and try to
most conflict — money.arrive at a mutually beneficial agreement.
It could be argued that the mediation part of theFinally, with regards to CEDR, it continues to innovate
process would be relativity low cost, in comparison toand remains at the forefront of ADR.