| dc.contributor.author | Sean Brannigan | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-05-08T21:20:54Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2017-05-08T21:20:54Z | |
| dc.date.copyright | April 2008 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2008 | |
| dc.identifier.other | %28asce%291052-3928%282008%29134%3A2%28209%29.pdf | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/47918 | |
| dc.description.abstract | This paper explores what has been the most successful attempt to date to introduce an “escape hatch” into the adjudication process for those on the wrong end of decisions: the area of natural justice. The decisions of the Technology and Construction Court relating to this area reflect the complexity of the key policy consideration underlying them: the extent to which judges should second guess adjudicators when it comes to matters of procedure. The paper argues that the Technology and Construction Court has in recent years reached a high water mark of intervention before being reigned in by the then senior judge of that court and by the Court of Appeal. It suggests that a more stable and predictable position now prevails. That certainty, common approach, and balance have been welcomed by the construction industry. This paper suggests that welcome is a better benchmark of whether the intervention/nonintervention debate has been correctly resolved than any academic or theoretical approach. | |
| dc.publisher | American Society of Civil Engineers | |
| dc.title | Judicial Intervention and Its Key Battleground: Natural Justice | |
| dc.type | Journal Paper | |
| dc.journal.volume | 134 | |
| dc.journal.issue | 2 | |
| dc.journal.title | Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2008)134:2(209) | |
| dc.tree | Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice:;2008:;Volume ( 134 ):;issue: 002 | |
| dc.contenttype | Fulltext | |