• Admin Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Faculty of Science and Engineering
    • Faculty of Science and Engineering
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Faculty of Science and Engineering
    • Faculty of Science and Engineering
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of WIRECommunitiesTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsTypesJournalDepartmentPublisherThis CollectionTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsTypesJournalDepartmentPublisher

    Administrators

    Admin Login

    Local Links

    AboutThe University LibraryOpen Access Publications PolicyDeposit LicenceCOREWIRE Copyright and Reuse Information

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    Early perceptions of allowing adjudication of oral contracts

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Authors
    Charlson, Jennifer
    Baldwin, Robert
    Harrison, Jamie
    Issue Date
    2014-10-07
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    The purpose of this paper is to consider the implications of the admission of oral contracts to statutory adjudication proceedings. A major criticism of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (“HGCRA 1996”) was that Section 107 required contracts to be “in writing” for the parties to be able to use statutory adjudication. In response, the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 repealed Section 107 of the HGCRA 1996. This paper considers the implications of the admission of oral contracts to statutory adjudication proceedings, whereby adjudicators’ may now have to determine the exact nature of oral agreements. The critical literature review has highlighted that there is a perceived risk that, by allowing oral contracts to be decided through adjudication, there could be an increased risk of injustice (as the adjudicator may have to decide oral testimony about contract formation). Adjudicators may now have to determine the exact nature of oral agreements. The critical literature review has highlighted that there is a perceived risk that by allowing oral contracts to be decided through adjudication there could be an increased risk of injustice (as the adjudicator may have to decide oral testimony about contract formation).
    Citation
    Early perceptions of allowing adjudication of oral contracts 2014, 6 (3):233 International Journal of Law in the Built Environment
    Publisher
    Emerald
    Journal
    International Journal of Law in the Built Environment
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/2436/565875
    DOI
    10.1108/IJLBE-02-2013-0004
    Additional Links
    http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/IJLBE-02-2013-0004
    Type
    Journal article
    Language
    en
    ISSN
    1756-1450
    ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
    10.1108/IJLBE-02-2013-0004
    Scopus Count
    Collections
    Faculty of Science and Engineering

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.