Apply Now

Want to apply for Adjudication?
Application Form
Important information

Below you will find some important information you need to know before applying for adjudication. Please take a minute to read through this page carefully before making your application.

The Notice of Adjudication

The first step in the process is to serve a Notice of Adjudication on the other party or parties to the dispute – these will be the other parties to the construction contract under which the dispute has arisen.

You may also choose to serve the Notice of Adjudication on the owner of the construction site where the owner is not a party to the construction contract and you wish to seek a determination of that owner’s liability under section 30(a) and/or approval for the issue of a charging order under section 30(b).

Applying to the Building Disputes Tribunal

The Building Disputes Tribunal (BDT) is an authorised nominating authority (ANA) under the Construction Contracts Act 2002 (the Act).

Any party to a dispute arising under a construction contract is entitled to apply to us for the appointment of an adjudicator. There is no requirement to try to agree on the identity of the adjudicator with the other party (although of course you are also entitled to do so). Instead, you can apply directly to BDT and we will appoint an appropriately skilled and experienced adjudicator for your case typically within one working day. BDT does not charge the parties a fee to make that appointment.

PLEASE NOTE: an application for appointment of an adjudicator must be made in the period between and including two to five working days after the notice of adjudication is served on the other parties to the adjudication (ie barring the occurrence of any statutory non-working days – if the notice is served on a Monday you cannot make your application to BDT until the Wednesday, Thursday or Friday of that week or the Monday of the following week – if the notice is served on a Friday you cannot make your application to BDT until the following Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday or Friday).

 

Vicarious liability and subcontractors

By Sam Dorne Liability in tort depends upon proof of a personal breach of duty, with one true exception, vicarious liability. The law of negligence is generally fault based; a defendant is personally liable only for the defendant’s own negligent acts and omissions....

Limitation for payment claims under construction contracts

By Sam Dorne The decision in Hirst v Dunbar [2022] EWHC 41 (TCC) considers the impact of payment provisions in a construction contract, whether through contract or implied terms, and the commencement of the limitation period for payment claims under the contract. It...

Extensions of time in construction contracts

By Jo O’Dea   In an extension of time claim, blame for the delay was a relevant consideration when assessing what was “fair and reasonable”.   In CAJ v CAI [2021] 5 GCA 102, the Singapore Court of Appeal considered the issue of extensions of time in...

Testing the waters: New South Wales Supreme Court considers the prevention principle

By Hannah Aziz  Court provides further confirmation that the prevention principle can be excluded by the terms of a contract.   Introduction Following our recent commentary comparing the operation of the prevention principle in New South Wales and Victoria, the...

Construction contract or product warranty? Not all collateral warranty disputes can be adjudicated

By Belinda Green Collateral warranties might be parasitic on a construction contract, but that doesn’t automatically mean they are one. The individual wording and circumstances need to be considered. In some cases, like in Toppan Holdings Limited v Simply Construction...

When you think the amount of your personal guarantee had a limit – but it didn’t.

In a recent Court of Appeal case, Cancian v Carters [2021] NZCA 397, Carters sought to enforce a personal guarantee against Mr Canican.  The Court dismissed an argument from Mr Cancian that Carters had not notified him that that the limit on his personal guarantee had...

Leaky Home Case: Failure to obtain a building report results in reduction of damages for contributory negligence

By Melt Strydom. Apportionment for contributory negligence allows a court to share the responsibility between parties in circumstances where the test for causation and remoteness of damage justifies it. It doesn’t mean a respondent will not be held liable for...

Do payment claims for retention money ‘fit’ with the standard terms of contract in New Zealand?

By Maria Cole The New Zealand Construction Contracts Act 2002 (CCA) does not explicitly state that payment claims can be used to recover retention money. That said, it is clear the 2015 amendments to the definition of a ‘payment’ under the CCA are broad enough to...

Resolving Construction Disputes – Is Adjudication a Good Option?

By Natalia Vila.   With few exceptions, the Construction Contracts Act 2002 (the Act) applies to every construction contract relating to construction work carried out in New Zealand. Statutory adjudication under the Act is the most commonly used dispute...

Cost certainty for resolving building and construction disputes: Extension to the BDT Adjudication Low Value Claim Scheme

By Belinda Green.   One of the main barriers to dispute resolution is cost: no one wants to risk spending more than the amount they recover. With inflation and construction costs always on the rise, BDT is extending its Low Value Claim (LVC) Scheme for...