At the REHDA Institute CIPAA – Legal Review: ‘Pay Now, Argue Later’, Ir. Harbans Singh K.S. (Professional & Chartered Engineer, Chartered Arbitrator, Mediator, Adjudicator, Advocate and Solicitor) gave his view on the Adjudication process, whether is adjudication a fast-track arbitration ?

This is in relation to Construction Industry And Payment Adjudication Act (CIPAA 2012). He spoke on the:

• The realities of adjudication process
• Two tier dispute resolution process

According to Ir. Harbans Singh., “‘Pay Now, Argue Later’, that is the whole essence of CIPAA. Pay now let the job move, if you are not happy, appeal, sort the things out later, atleast work will go on”. He gave the analogy that if you have the cashflow, you deliver.

Ir. Harbans Singh gave this conclusion (source REHDA Institute):

– ADJUDICATION UNDER CIPAA HAS APPARENTLY GONE SOMEWHAT “OFF TRACK” AND TRANSFORMED INTO “FAST TRACK ARBITRATION” NOT CONTEMPLATED WHEN FIRST ENACTED
– MUST REVERT TO THE INITIAL PURPOSES/OBJECTIVES
– MUST ENSURE NOT ONLY “Fast Justice” but also “Rough Justice” METED IN A SUMMARY MANNER TO UPHOLD THE REQUIREMENT OF “Pay First, Argue Later” WHICH IS A HALMARK OF ADJUDICATION.
– IF NOT PUT BACK ON TRACK, INDUSTRY WILL LOSE TRUST/CONFIDENCE IN EFFECTIVENESS OF ADJUDICATION AND IT WILL SOON SUFFER THE SAME, SAD FATE THAT ARBITRATION HAS SUFFERRED IN THIS COUNTRY.
– COURTS MUST ATTEMPT TO REVERT TO THEIR EARLIER APPROACH IN FULLY SUPPORTING STATUTORY ADJUDICATION AND THE OBJECTIVES OF CIPAA, WHICH APPARENTLY SEEMS TO BE ABERRATED OF LATE.
– IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS, IF ABOVE SHORTCOMINGS ARE NOT ADDRESSED PROMPTLY, THE ONLY EFFECTIVE OPTION LEFT TO AN UNPAID PARTY TO PURSUE WOULD BE TO AVOID ADJUDICATION AT ALL COST AND STRAIGHT AWAY LITIGATE ITS DISPUTE AS THIS WILL BE CHEAPER, FASTER AND MORE EFFECTIVE.