Expert determination becoming more familiar (2016) 27 5 Cons.Law 17 [Archived]
Expert determination becoming more familiar (2016) 27 5 Cons.Law 17 [Archived]

The following Construction guidance note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Expert determination becoming more familiar (2016) 27 5 Cons.Law 17 [Archived]
  • Procedure
  • Evidence
  • Liability
  • Challenging the decision
  • Enforcement
  • Costs
  • Timing
  • Conclusion
  • Summary

This article appears as originally published in Construction Law on 6 June 2016 and is not maintained.

Barristers Catherine Piercy and Andy Creer of Hardwicke consider the relative merits of using expert determination over arbitration as an alternative means of dispute resolution. The former is increasingly used where a valuation has to be determined or a technical expert opinion required.

KEY POINTS

  1. Expert determination is more unfamiliar than arbitration to some and the case law is less developed

  2. Uncertainty surrounds the jurisdiction of the expert, the procedure and the nature of the decision

  3. It is however often a quicker, cheaper and less adversarial method of resolving disputes

  4. This can assist in maintaining good relations between commercial parties

  5. Arbitrations can be incredibly expensive, whereas expert determination often presents a much cheaper method of dispute resolution

Arbitration is a long established dispute resolution procedure and commercial parties, their advisors and the courts are familiar with the process and the extent to which the court will intervene. Expert determination presents more unfamiliar territory to some and the case law is less developed, resulting in more uncertainty as to the jurisdiction of the expert, the procedure and the nature of the decision. However, as further explained below, it often presents a quicker, cheaper and less adversarial method of resolving disputes, which may assist in maintaining good relations between