Adjudicator bias can really hit you where it hurts - even if you did not actually seek to persuade the adjudicator to be biased and even if there is no evidence that he was in fact biased. It's all about a "real possibility of bias", an issue that came to the fore in the case of Amec vs Whitefriars. The basic facts are that Whitefriars engaged Amec by a letter of intent in October 2000. Work on site commenced in May 2001 and three months later, when the parties could not agree on a second stage tender, Whitefriars determined the letter of intent. Amec had then been paid―204,000 and invoiced for a further ―500,000, which had not been paid. On the face of it, it is disputes of this size and type that adjudication was designed to resolve.
展开▼
机译：裁决者的偏见确实可以在伤害您的地方打击您-即使您实际上并未试图说服裁决者有偏见，即使没有证据表明他实际上有偏见。这全都是关于“存在偏见的真实可能性”，在Amec vs Whitefriars一案中，这个问题就显得尤为突出。基本事实是，Whitefriars于2000年10月以意向书与Amec签约。现场工作于2001年5月开始，三个月后，当事双方无法就第二阶段招标达成协议时，Whitefriars决定了意向书。然后向Amec支付了204,000并开具了500,000的发票，但尚未支付。从表面上看，裁定旨在解决这种规模和类型的争议。
展开▼
