Pay now argue later
Construction Law Barrister Robert Fenwick Elliott coined the expression ‘Pay now, argue later’ to describe the adjudication process in early 1996 during discussions with Lord Howie of Troon in the tea room at the House of Lords. He describes below how this came about.
Lord Howie was a Scottish engineer, picking up the recommendation in Sir Michael Latham’s Report ‘Constructing the team’ to introduce an adjudication scheme into construction contracts, and very sensibly sought the input of TeCSA (Technology and Construction Solicitors’ Association) as to how this might best be done.
I was advising him to stay clear of his initial idea of making the adjudicator’s decision final and binding, on the basis that if it was final and binding, it would be impossible to prevent the courts from placing all sorts of obstacles in the way of enforcement. It was a play on the old hire purchase slogan: 'Buy now, pay later'. I said that if an adjudication loser was obliged to pay up, without prejudice to its right to then fight it out in the courts or arbitration to try to get it back, that would achieve the objective we were looking for, but minimising the risk of court interference. It would be rare, I predicted, that this right to 'argue later' would be used very much in practice. Happily, he agreed, and my prediction eventually proved good.
Lord Howie mentioned the formulation in debate on 28th March 1996, as did Lord Akner on 22nd April 1996.
It was picked up by the courts in the UK in Homer Burgess Ltd v Chirex (Annan) Ltd [1999 ScotCS 264 (10 November 1999)] and then in Australia in Multiplex Constructions Pty Ltd v Luikens and Anor [2003 NSWSC 1140 (4 December 2003).
Since then it has been used many times to characterise the nature of the adjudication process.
This article originally appeared at Pay now, Argue Later 15/01/2016.
It was written by --Robert Fenwick Elliott.
[edit] Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki
- Adjudication.
- Alternative dispute resolution.
- Arbitration Act.
- Arbitration.
- Breach of contract.
- Causes of construction disputes.
- Conciliation.
- Contract claims.
- Dispute resolution boards.
- Mediation.
- Pendulum arbitration
- Seven day letter
- The Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act.
- The Scheme for Construction Contracts.
Featured articles and news
Designing for neurodiversity: driving change for the better
Accessible inclusive design translated into reality.
RIBA detailed response to Grenfell Inquiry Phase 2 report
Briefing notes following its initial 4 September response.
Approved Document B: Fire Safety from March
Current and future changes with historical documentation.
A New Year, a new look for BSRIA
As phase 1 of the BSRIA Living Laboratory is completed.
A must-attend event for the architecture industry.
Caroline Gumble to step down as CIOB CEO in 2025
After transformative tenure take on a leadership role within the engineering sector.
RIDDOR and the provisional statistics for 2023 / 2024
Work related deaths; over 50 percent from constructuon and 50 percent recorded as fall from height.
Solar PV company fined for health and safety failure
Work at height not properly planned and failure to take suitable steps to prevent a fall.
The term value when assessing the viability of developments
Consultation on the compulsory purchase process, compensation reforms and potential removal of hope value.
Trees are part of the history of how places have developed.
The increasing costs of repair and remediation
Highlighted by regulator of social housing, as acceleration plan continues.
Free topic guide on mould in buildings
The new TG 26/2024 published by BSRIA.
Greater control for LAs over private rental selective licensing
A brief explanation of changes with the NRLA response.
Practice costs for architectural technologists
Salary standards and working out what you’re worth.
The Health and Safety Executive at 50
And over 200 years of Operational Safety and Health.
Thermal imaging surveys a brief intro
Thermal Imaging of Buildings; a pocket guide BG 72/2017.