The TeCSA Adjudication Service

The overriding objective of the TeCSA Adjudication Service is to promote high quality dispute resolution processes to the construction, engineering and technology industries.

In order to meet this objective, the TeCSA Adjudication Service has reviewed and updated its Service, Rules and Nomination processes as follows:

  • requiring the referring party to send a copy of the nomination form to the responding party at the same time as the nomination form is sent to TeCSA.  TeCSA also retains the absolute discretion to send any documents or other communications to the other party as appropriate;
  • updating the applicable nomination fee payable to TeCSA to £350 and increase the cap on Adjudicator's daily fees to £2,500 to ensure that TeCSA continues to attract the best in class adjudicators; and
  • providing that if an agreed Adjudicaotr has not confirmed his willingness to act, than any Party shall no later than 2 days after receipt of the Notice apply to TeCSA for a nomination;
  • updating the grievance procedure for adjudications:

          -  Appeal Committee to consist of 3 appropriately qualified and experience individuals

          -  Appeal Committee to review the facts and information available to the original decision maker as well as any new facts or information which, whilst not before the original decision makers, were in existence at the time of the TeCSA Decision and are relevant.

          -  Appellant and TeCSA shall bear any and/or all of their legal or other costs

  • updating its guidance on potential bias and conflicts of interest and requiring potential Adjudicators, before acceptance of a nomination, to confirm to TeCSA (and on an ongoing basis) that they do not have any conflict of interest and are not aware of any matter which would reasonably give rise to concerns as to apparent bias.

The updated Service, Rules and Nomination forms will be live from 21st March 2018.

The updated Servce, Rules and Nomination forms are available here:

Comparisons highlighting the chages made to the Service, Rules and Nomination forms are available here:


CLICK HERE for a flyer identifying the key attributes of the Rules.

A brief overview of TeCSA & its Adjudication Service:

  • TeCSA played an important lobbying role during the passage of both the Construction Act and the subsidiary Scheme for Construction Contracts through Parliament and in like fashion the LDEDCA. It was the first organisation to publish a set of rules complying with the Construction Act and, in certain material respects, the Scheme for Construction Contracts borrowed some of its features. The TeCSA Adjudication Rules(currently version 3.2.1) can be easily used in place of the adjudication rules in the Government Scheme for Construction Contracts.
  • TeCSA maintains a multidisciplinary panel of adjudicators, many of whom are TeCSA trained, from which the Chairman makes appointments.
  • TeCSA’s Adjudication Rules have proved a popular choice over the years for two reasons. Firstly, the rules are radical about trying to ensure that the dispute is actually resolved notwithstanding the short time limits laid down by the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 as amended. Secondly, its rules do more than most to ensure the enforceability of adjudication decisions in practice. This principle lies at the heart of these rules and a quick skim of the Hansard debates will confirm that that is precisely how Parliament intended the legislation to work.
  • The Rules make clear the underlying purpose of the Adjudication is to decide disputes between the Parties that are within the scope of the Adjudication as rapidly and economically as is reasonably possible.
  • In terms of making adjudication decisions as watertight as possible for the purposes of enforcement, Rule 12 of the rules gives the adjudicator the power to decide his own substantive jurisdiction. Without such a provision, which is still fairly unusual, the adjudicator would not be empowered to make a binding decision in this regard. What normally happens in such circumstances is that the jurisdiction issue is simply held over until after the adjudicator has reached his decisions and the successful party seeks to enforce his substantive decision through summary court proceedings. A decision by the adjudicator upon his own jurisdiction cannot be re-opened by the losing party in the context of summary enforcement proceedings save in the most exceptional circumstances.