UK: Adjudicator’s decision not enforced due to a party’s misrepresentations in the appointment process

In a landmark decision, the Technology and Construction Court has refused to enforce an adjudicator's decision because the adjudicator had been invalidly appointed, due to misrepresentation by one party on its application to the appointing body.  The decision is a clear warning to parties that objections to adjudicators must be made honestly and not for ulterior motives:  Eurocom Ltd v Siemens plc [2014] EWHC 3710 (TCC).

In essence, the court accepted that the party's indication that various potential adjudicators had a conflict of interest was false or reckless and was designed for the purpose  of excluding those that the party did not want to be appointed    Although the courts have previously warned against improper interference with the adjudicator nomination process, this is the first decision to give that principle practical effect by refusing to enforce an adjudicator's decision on the basis of such conduct.

Read more on the decision in our Construction team's bulletin 'Appointing Adjudicators – The Limits of Objection'.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Adjudication, Construction, UK

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *