In construction adjudication, jurisdiction means the adjudicator’s legal authority to decide the dispute that has been referred. Although adjudication is intended to be a quick and practical form of dispute resolution, it remains subject to important legal and procedural limits. An adjudicator does not have authority to decide every issue placed before them. Their jurisdiction depends on the terms of the contract, the relevant statutory framework and the way in which the dispute has been referred as well as its scope and crystallisation.
Jurisdiction should be considered carefully by both parties from the outset. A responding party may challenge jurisdiction during the adjudication itself, reserve its position while participating, or raise the issue later if enforcement is sought. A referring party should take equal care at the start of the process, as defects in the referral are not always easy to correct once the adjudication timetable, which is strict and short, is underway.
Jurisdiction issues commonly arise in a number of situations. These include uncertainty over whether a contract or a qualifying construction contract exists, whether a conflict of interest exists, whether the contract is for a residential occupier, whether statutory adjudication provisions apply despite there not being adjudication rights under the contract or vice versa, whether the dispute has arisen under the contract, are parties in adjudication the correct parties with rights to adjudicate under the contract or in law, whether a dispute has properly crystallised, whether the reference concerns one dispute or several disputes, whether the adjudicator was appointed in accordance with the applicable procedure, and whether the dispute being decided is in fact the same dispute that was referred.
Although construction adjudication is designed to be fast and practical, jurisdiction remains a key issue. Even where the underlying claim appears strong, a jurisdictional error can create delay, additional cost and enforcement risk.
Jurisdiction is significant because, if the adjudicator lacks jurisdiction, the adjudication may be disrupted, the adjudicator may resign, or any decision ultimately reached may prove unenforceable. Adjudicators’ decisions are temporarily binding and are usually enforced by the Court. However, if the losing party can show that the adjudicator lacked jurisdiction, enforcement may be resisted. That does not mean every jurisdiction challenge will succeed, but it does mean the issue can have significant practical and financial consequences.
Jurisdiction is therefore not merely a technical legal point. It can have a direct impact on strategy, timing and outcome, and is often one of the first issues parties should consider when adjudication is threatened or commenced.
How CCC can assist
CCC regularly advises contractors, subcontractors and developers involved in adjudications across a wide range of projects. We assist clients in preparing for adjudication, developing clear and proportionate strategies, and managing the process efficiently under tight time constraints. Our focus is on helping parties present their case clearly and effectively, while avoiding common procedural and evidential pitfalls that can have lasting consequences.
