Purpose – This paper investigates the provisions within the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (‘HGCRA’) and/or the supplementary provisions to establish if a statutory right exists for a party to adopt adjudication as an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methodology to resolve a dilapidations dispute and thus avoid costly litigation.
Design/Methodology/Approach – An extensive literature review and analysis of the relevant legal cases, statutory legislation and limited literature on the dilapidations and adjudication was undertaken to obtain all relevant information to investigate the question this paper raises.
Findings – This paper contributes to the extant law by demonstrating that such lease obligations as repairing, maintaining, and painting are a ‘construction operation’ under section 105 of the HGCRA and that a lease is an agreement for ‘construction operations’ under sections 104 (1) and (5) – thus creating a construction contract, although primarily not a construction contract. Accordingly, it is therefore open to a party to commence adjudication as an ADR methodology to resolve a dilapidations dispute.
Originality/Value – The question this paper raises is unique in that it is has not previously been tested within the Courts. There is limited literature on the question and no explicit authority that prohibits the use of adjudication for dilapidations disputes. Therefore, the paper introduces both an interesting and very important legal argument that advances and contributes to the extant law by demonstrating that adjudication is applicable to dilapidations disputes.
Arbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management