The Plaintiff sought to challenge the outcome of an adjudication
proceeding between the two parties on the grounds that the decision
was unfair and contrary to natural justice. The Plaintiff alleged
that the adjudicator failed to notify the parties of the substance
of his decision or allow them to comment on it, and further failed
to give reasons with respect to costs or awards. As a result, the
Plaintiff sought to have the adjudicator's decision rendered
void.
In supporting his position, the Plaintiff argued that the role
of an adjudicator was similar to that of an arbitrator. The Court
however considered the duties of the adjudicator with regard to
costs, liability and quantum as distinct from the duties required
by an arbitrator. The Court agreed with the judgment of Balfor
Beatty Construction Ltd v Lambert London BC Macob [2002] EWHC
597 (TCC) that, while more generally the role of an adjudicator is
similar to an arbitrator, they are not the same. The Court
