Dispute Resolution Services
Expert Services International can provide dispute resolution services in the United Kingdom under the Arbitration Act 1996, LCIA and CIArb rules, statutory adjudication and mediation.
United Kingdom Dispute Resolution Practice
Dispute resolution in the United Kingdom is governed by the Arbitration Act 1996, which provides the statutory framework for arbitration. The Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (as amended by the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009) establishes statutory adjudication for construction disputes.
Expert Services International can provide arbitration, adjudication, mediation, expert determination and dispute advisory services in the United Kingdom. The LCIA, ICC and CIArb administer institutional arbitrations, and CEDR provides mediation services. The TCC is the specialist court for construction disputes.
The United Kingdom is a common law jurisdiction. The Arbitration Act 1996 provides the statutory framework for arbitration, and the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 establishes statutory adjudication for construction disputes.
Commercial Arbitration
The Arbitration Act 1996 provides the legislative foundation for international commercial arbitration seated in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The Act reflects core principles of party autonomy (allowing parties to agree upon procedural rules, the seat of arbitration, and the substantive law governing their dispute), minimal court intervention (with the courts deferring to arbitral tribunals except in narrowly defined circumstances), and the duties of disclosure, impartiality and fair dealing imposed upon arbitral tribunals. The Act has been recognised as a gold standard for arbitration legislation and has been adopted or emulated by many other jurisdictions seeking to establish themselves as centres for international dispute resolution.
The Arbitration Act 2025, which received Royal Assent on 24 February 2025, modernised the Act to reflect contemporary developments in international arbitration practice and to reinforce London's status as the world's leading arbitration centre. The 2025 Act introduced a statutory duty of arbitrator disclosure, reinforcing the common law duties previously established through case law and clarifying that an arbitrator's duty to disclose is now codified in statute. The 2025 Act also provides a new default rule that the governing law of the arbitration agreement will be the law of the seat of the arbitration unless the parties expressly agree otherwise, addressing a significant source of uncertainty in cases where the substantive law governing the underlying dispute differs from the law of the seat.
The 2025 Act introduced important procedural innovations, including the introduction of summary awards, allowing a tribunal to make an award on a summary basis where a party has no real prospect of succeeding on a claim or defence, and provisions confirming and regulating emergency arbitration procedures where the parties have agreed to such procedures. These additions reflect international best practice and provide parties with additional tools for managing dispute resolution efficiently and cost-effectively.
Commercial arbitrations seated in England are commonly conducted under the LCIA Rules (2020), the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Arbitration Rules, or the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb) Rules, each of which has been developed to reflect contemporary international practice. Parties seeking to challenge an arbitral award on grounds of jurisdiction, serious irregularity or on a point of law must do so under the applicable provisions of the Arbitration Act 1996 (sections 67, 68 and 69 respectively). These grounds for challenging awards are deliberately narrow, reflecting the legislative policy that finality and certainty should be prioritised and that courts should not re-litigate the merits of cases that have been arbitrated. The International Bar Association Rules on Taking of Evidence provide guidance that is widely adopted in English arbitration proceedings, and the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators' Protocol for Party-Appointed Expert Witnesses in International Arbitration provides detailed guidance on the management of expert evidence.
Third-party funding of arbitration is expressly permitted in England and Wales and is regulated through a combination of statutory rules and common law principles. The availability of third-party funding, combined with the procedural flexibility of arbitration and the expertise available in London, makes commercial arbitration an attractive dispute resolution mechanism for large, complex and high-value construction and engineering disputes. Many international construction and engineering contracts incorporate arbitration clauses providing for the resolution of disputes under English law and through arbitration seated in London, with LCIA rules being the most frequently selected institutional framework for such proceedings.
Statutory Adjudication
The Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (HGCRA) introduced a revolutionary dispute resolution mechanism for construction contracts by establishing a statutory right to adjudication. The Act, which came into force in May 1998, provides that any party to a construction contract has the right to refer a dispute to an adjudicator at any time, and the adjudicator is required to issue a binding decision within twenty-eight days of the referral (extendable to forty-two days with the agreement of the referring party). This rapid, binding adjudication procedure was designed to address payment disputes during the course of construction contracts and to prevent the withholding of monies from destabilising construction projects.
The HGCRA has been amended by the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 (LDEDC Act), which extended the scope of statutory adjudication and clarified that adjudication rights apply to oral contracts as well as written contracts, and that adjudication applies to all construction contracts with only limited exclusions (such as contracts with residential occupiers). The Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998 provides a statutory scheme for the conduct of adjudication, establishing default procedures that apply where the contract itself does not contain adjudication provisions. This statutory scheme ensures that all construction contracts, regardless of their sophistication or the experience of the parties, have a mechanism for rapid dispute resolution.
The defining principle of statutory adjudication is the "pay now, argue later" principle established in the leading case of Macob Civil Engineering Ltd v Morrison Construction Ltd. This principle reflects the legislative policy that adjudication decisions should be rapidly enforceable and should not be suspended or revisited through the courts on the grounds of the merits of the adjudicator's decision. The Technology and Construction Court has consistently held that adjudicator decisions are enforceable through summary judgment procedures, with the courts declining to re-open the merits of adjudications except in the narrowest circumstances where there has been a manifest procedural injustice.
Adjudicators are typically appointed through nominating bodies including the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb), the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE), the Technology and Construction Bar Association (TECBAR), and specialist panels maintained by individual firms. The adjudication process is designed to be rapid, proportionate and cost-effective, making it ideal for disputes that require urgent resolution during the course of construction. Expert evidence, including expert reports, measurements, test results and quality certificates, is readily admissible in adjudication proceedings, and adjudicators have broad discretion to direct the form and manner of evidence presentation. The Scheme for Construction Contracts establishes default procedures for the exchange of written submissions and evidence, with minimal oral hearing rights unless the adjudicator directs otherwise.
Commercial Mediation
Mediation and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms are strongly promoted within the English legal system as cost-effective and timely alternatives to litigation and arbitration. The Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR) is the leading mediation provider in the United Kingdom and maintains a panel of experienced mediators across specialised areas including construction and engineering disputes. The Technology and Construction Court operates under a pre-action protocol that encourages parties to attempt ADR before commencing TCC proceedings, and the court has the power to impose adverse costs consequences on parties who unreasonably refuse to engage in ADR.
The courts have increasingly recognised the value of mediation and ADR in achieving fair, proportionate and swift dispute resolution. In Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council [2023] EWCA Civ 1416, the Court of Appeal held that courts have the power to order parties to engage in alternative dispute resolution processes, provided that such orders do not undermine the party's right to a fair hearing and are proportionate to achieving the legitimate aim of settling disputes fairly, quickly and at reasonable cost. This landmark decision has encouraged the greater use of court-ordered mediation in commercial disputes and has reinforced the judicial policy of requiring parties to explore settlement opportunities before proceeding to full trial or arbitration.
Many construction contracts incorporate mediation provisions, reflecting the widespread recognition that mediation can be an effective mechanism for addressing disputes before they escalate to adjudication, arbitration or litigation. The standard form contracts used in UK construction, including those published by the Joint Contracts Tribunal (JCT), the New Engineering Contract (NEC) suite, and the FIDIC contracts, all contain detailed mediation procedures. These procedures typically provide for a pre-mediation meeting at which the parties identify the issues in dispute and the key persons involved, followed by a mediation conducted by an independent mediator selected by agreement. The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators also provides mediation services and has developed detailed guidance on mediation procedures.
Expert Determination
Expert determination is widely used in the United Kingdom as a mechanism for the resolution of technical disputes, particularly in relation to valuation, measurement, defects and technical matters arising under construction contracts. Expert determination differs fundamentally from arbitration and adjudication in that the expert determination is conducted by a single expert appointed by the parties (or by default procedures where the parties cannot agree), and the expert's role is to investigate the facts, apply their professional expertise and knowledge, and issue a determination that is binding (unless the contract provides that it is binding only unless manifest error).
Expert determination is provided for in many standard form construction contracts, including the JCT forms, the NEC suite and the FIDIC contracts. The contractual provisions typically provide that disputes concerning matters within the expert's field of expertise may be referred to expert determination, and that the expert's determination is final and binding unless manifest error can be demonstrated. The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators provides an administered expert determination service and has developed detailed guidance on expert determination procedures. Expert determination is particularly suited to disputes that turn on technical or valuation matters, as opposed to disputes involving contested factual findings or the application of contract law principles.
Expert determination provides a faster, less formal and more cost-effective mechanism than arbitration for the resolution of technical disputes. The expert is not required to observe the rules of evidence and procedures applicable in litigation or arbitration, and the expert determination process can be tailored by the parties to suit the particular issues in dispute. However, expert determinations are subject to the common law principles established through case law, which provide that the expert must act within the scope of the appointment, must not act arbitrarily or capriciously, must observe basic procedural fairness, and must not exceed their jurisdiction by determining matters that fall outside their appointment.
Dispute Boards
Dispute boards, also known as dispute avoidance and adjudication boards (DAABs) under the FIDIC 2017 contract suite, provide a standing mechanism for the proactive management and resolution of disputes throughout the course of a project. A dispute board is typically appointed at the commencement of a project and comprises one or three independent and impartial persons selected by the contracting parties. The dispute board's mandate includes a dispute avoidance function (whereby the board assists the parties in identifying and resolving potential disputes before they escalate) and an adjudication function (whereby the board has the power to issue binding or non-binding determinations on disputes referred to it).
The FIDIC Dispute Avoidance/Adjudication Board (DAAB) procedures, set out in the FIDIC 2017 contract suite, provide a comprehensive framework for the appointment, conduct and authority of dispute boards. The DAAB is typically required to make periodic site visits, attend project meetings and be available to receive referrals from either party. The DAAB issues decisions on disputes within a specified timeframe (typically 84 days) and these decisions are binding unless and until they are reviewed through the project's dispute review procedures or through arbitration. Dispute boards are particularly effective on large-scale energy and infrastructure projects with long project lifecycles, where the investment in a standing dispute board is justified by the scale of the project and the potential for disputes to arise over the course of project implementation.
The United Kingdom has seen growing use of dispute boards on major infrastructure projects, including the use of FIDIC dispute boards and other specialist dispute board arrangements on projects including HS2 (the high-speed rail project), Crossrail, and the Thames Tideway Tunnel project. The ICC Dispute Board Rules 2015 provide an alternative institutional framework for dispute board arrangements, whilst the NEC suite incorporates adjudicator appointment procedures that reflect similar principles to those applicable in dispute boards. Dispute boards combine the advantages of rapid decision-making (avoiding the delays associated with formal arbitration or litigation), proactive dispute avoidance (reducing the ultimate quantum of disputes), and a level of expertise and contextual knowledge (derived from the board members' continuing involvement with the project) that is difficult to replicate in conventional dispute resolution procedures.
Contemporary Issues
The United Kingdom's dispute resolution framework continues to evolve in response to developments in international practice and technological change. The Arbitration Act 2025, which received Royal Assent on 24 February 2025 and entered into force on 1 August 2025, represents the most significant reform of English arbitration law since the enactment of the Arbitration Act 1996. The 2025 Act introduces statutory duties of arbitrator disclosure (replacing or supplementing common law disclosure requirements), new default rules governing the law applicable to arbitration agreements, and provisions for summary awards and emergency arbitration procedures. These reforms reflect the Law Commission's determination to maintain London's competitive position as the world's leading arbitration centre in the face of recent reforms to arbitration legislation in other major jurisdictions.
The courts' increasing willingness to order parties into mediation and ADR proceedings, established through the landmark decision in Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council [2023] EWCA Civ 1416, has transformed the dispute resolution landscape by confirming that courts can, in appropriate circumstances, compel parties to engage in non-court-based dispute resolution processes. This development has reinforced the judicial policy of encouraging settlement and proportionate dispute resolution, and has led to increased use of mediation as a mandated step in many litigated disputes.
Technology continues to play an increasingly significant role in UK dispute resolution. Virtual hearings and online dispute resolution procedures have become well-established following the COVID-19 pandemic, with both arbitration institutions and courts now routinely conducting hearings using video conferencing technology. The use of artificial intelligence and data analytics tools in the preparation of cases, the management of evidence and the prediction of dispute outcomes is also developing, although the courts remain cautious about the reliability and accountability of such tools. The TCC and other courts have issued practice directions addressing the use of technology and artificial intelligence in litigation, reflecting broader concerns about maintaining the authenticity and reliability of evidence and arguments presented to courts and tribunals.
International Expertise
Expert Services International provides dispute resolution services across the United Kingdom, with particular expertise in the distinctive mechanisms available in England and Wales. Our practice, led by Neil Kirkpatrick, a quantity surveyor and chartered arbitrator with decades of experience in construction and infrastructure disputes, combines technical expertise in quantum, delay, disruption and construction defects with knowledge of UK dispute resolution frameworks, the Arbitration Act 1996, statutory adjudication procedures and the requirements of the Technology and Construction Court.
We prepare expert reports that comply strictly with applicable standards and procedural requirements, we provide expert evidence and testimony capable of withstanding expert and tribunal scrutiny, and we participate effectively in expert procedures including concurrent evidence sessions and expert meetings designed to narrow technical issues and promote resolution.
Our Expertise
Expert Services International can provide dispute resolution services to parties involved in construction and infrastructure disputes. Our services include acting as arbitrator, expert determiner and mediator. We also provide expert witness reports and testimony addressing quantum, delay, disruption, construction defects, contractual interpretation, variations, liquidated damages and claims for set-off.
We prepare claims submissions, expert reports and advocacy for use in arbitration, expert determination, mediation and dispute board proceedings. We can assist parties with the preparation and presentation of claims and defences across all forms of dispute resolution.
Service Scope
Acting as arbitrator in domestic and international arbitration proceedings. We manage all aspects of arbitral procedure, conduct efficient hearings and deliver reasoned awards addressing the issues in dispute in accordance with applicable law and the parties' contractual framework.
Acting as expert determiner under contractual expert determination clauses and institutional rules. Expert determination provides a binding resolution of technical and valuation disputes by a suitably qualified professional, typically within a shorter timeframe than arbitration or litigation.
Preparation of expert reports addressing quantum, delay, disruption, construction defects, contractual interpretation, variations, liquidated damages and claims for set-off. We provide expert testimony in arbitration, court proceedings, mediation and expert determination proceedings.
Acting as mediator and providing mediation services to assist parties in reaching a negotiated resolution of disputes. We facilitate structured discussions, assist in identifying common ground and help parties achieve settlement without the need for formal adjudication.
Acting as dispute board member, chairperson or single neutral on major infrastructure projects. Dispute boards provide a standing mechanism for the rapid resolution of disputes during project execution, maintaining familiarity with the project throughout its duration.
Preparation of claims submissions and expert analysis for use in arbitration, expert determination, mediation and dispute board proceedings. We assist parties with the preparation and presentation of claims and defences addressing quantum, delay, disruption and contractual matters.
