In what circumstances may a party challenge an adjudicator's fees as unreasonable?
A party should not assume that dissatisfaction with the amount of an adjudicator's account creates a recoverable claim. The appointment terms, agreed rate, recorded work, allocation of liability, reservation of rights and any allegation of bad faith must be examined separately.
A fee challenge requires a proper contractual or statutory basis, not a comparison with what the party expected the adjudication to cost
A claim based on an asserted excess of hours was rejected on appeal, and it was later observed that fee challenges will rarely have a realistic basis. That does not justify saying that fees can never be disputed. A party may need to examine whether the adjudicator was validly appointed, performed the service required for entitlement to payment, charged the agreed rate, allocated the account in accordance with the decision and acted without bad faith. If the objection concerns time spent, demand an itemised account and preserve the objection before payment. Do not withhold payment merely because the decision was unfavourable.
| Issue | Position |
|---|---|
| Agreed hourly or daily rate | Normally binds the parties |
| Hours said to be excessive | Requires evidence, not comparison alone |
| Invalid appointment or no fee entitlement | Separate contractual issue |
| Bad faith alleged | Requires a properly evidenced case |
| Payment under protest | Record grounds and reserve recovery rights |
The rest of this solution is for members
Fifty of the two hundred contractual solutions are free to read. This is one of the remaining hundred and fifty, which Premium and Pro carry.
See what Premium includesAlready a member? Sign in