In the complex world of construction, disputes regarding payments, delays, and contract terms are not uncommon. For developers, lenders, and contractors operating in Jersey, understanding the available dispute resolution mechanisms is critical to protecting project timelines and financial interests.
England and Wales operate a statutory scheme under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, granting parties rights to adjudicate disputes under construction contracts (the "Scheme"). Jersey is a separate legal jurisdiction, distinct from England and Wales, and operates no such equivalent scheme.
A recent judgment of the Royal Court of Jersey (the "Royal Court") in Augres Construction Supplies Limited v Legendre Contractors Limited [2025] JRC 054 ("Augres v Legendre") underscores the importance of adjudication as a contractual remedy - especially in Jersey, where no statutory adjudication scheme currently exists.
What is adjudication?
Adjudication under the Scheme is a fast-track dispute resolution process designed to keep construction projects moving. It allows parties to resolve disputes on an interim basis (typically within 28 days) without halting construction work or resorting to lengthy litigation.
Why it matters in Jersey
Most construction contracts in Jersey will utilise a version of an English construction contract issued by the Joint Contracts Tribunal ("JCT") and adapted for use in Jersey.
Although Jersey does not have a statutory adjudication scheme, parties can contractually adopt the Scheme for construction contracts. The Royal Court has confirmed that where parties do so, the English legal framework and relevant case law will be applied.
In Augres v Legendre, the Royal Court noted that many Jersey construction contracts are based on JCT templates and that adjudication clauses are often deleted due to misconceptions about their enforceability in Jersey.
The Royal Court highlighted that deletion of all adjudication clauses in construction contracts leaves litigation as the only remedy (an expensive and disruptive option).
Key takeaways for clients
- Adjudication is contractual in Jersey: whilst not governed by a statutory scheme, adjudication can be included in contracts by agreement. This provides a valuable alternative to litigation or arbitration.
- Speed and cost-effectiveness: adjudication offers a quicker and more affordable route to resolving disputes, helping maintain cash flow and project momentum.
- Judicial support: the Royal Court encourages the use of adjudication and has highlighted the risks of removing adjudication as a contractual remedy.
- Alternatives to adjudication: where the parties choose not to incorporate the Scheme into a Jersey construction contract, alternative methods of dispute resolution should be considered in the contract.
- Strategic contract drafting: parties to construction contracts should generally refrain from removing adjudication clauses in their contracts (especially where there is no other alternative dispute resolution as a contractual remedy).
Conclusion
We strongly recommend that parties to construction contracts and funders:
- review standard contract templates (e.g., JCT) to ensure adjudication provisions are retained or appropriately adapted;
- seek legal advice before removing adjudication or arbitration clauses; and
- consider adjudication as a proactive strategy to manage disputes and protect project delivery.
If you would like any further information, please get in touch with your usual Bedell Cristin contact or one of the contacts listed.
