Disputes in public infrastructure projects can quickly escalate, disrupting timelines, budgets and stakeholder relationships.

This three-part series guides you through the lifecycle of conflict in these high-stakes projects. In the first article, Why disputes happen in public infrastructure projects (and how to prevent them), we examined the root causes of disputes and preventive strategies.

In this article, we focus on how disputes can be resolved efficiently through adjudication, mediation, arbitration and other alternative methods. The series concludes with Managing high-stakes infrastructure disputes: a practical playbook for project teams, offering actionable guidance for controlling disputes while keeping projects moving.

Most construction contracts follow a structured approach:

1. Negotiation
2. Mediation
3. Adjudication
4. Arbitration or litigation.

This staged process ensures that the most cost-effective and least disruptive methods are used first, with formal proceedings reserved as a last resort.

Adjudication is a fast-track dispute resolution process widely used in the UK construction industry.

It provides a temporarily binding decision, allowing projects to continue while disputes are resolved.

Its primary purpose is to protect cash flow.

Courts take a strong pro-enforcement stance on adjudication decisions. They will generally enforce them unless there is a clear breach of natural justice or a lack of jurisdiction.

This makes adjudication one of the most effective tools for managing disputes during live projects.

Mediation is a voluntary, non-binding process in which an independent mediator helps parties reach a mutually acceptable agreement.

It is particularly effective where:

• Ongoing relationships matter
• Both parties are open to compromise
• A quick resolution is needed.

Mediation focuses on commercial outcomes rather than legal positions, making it a practical option in many cases.

Arbitration is a formal dispute resolution process, often used for high-value or complex disputes.

It results in a binding decision and is commonly included in construction contracts.

Arbitration offers:

• Confidentiality
• Flexibility in process
• A neutral forum.

However, it can be time-consuming and costly, making it better suited to serious disputes.

Dispute review boards
Independent experts who monitor projects and intervene early to prevent escalation.

Expert determination
Used for technical disputes, where a specialist provides a binding decision on a specific issue.

Selecting the appropriate method depends on several factors:

• Value of the dispute
• Urgency
• Complexity
• Importance of maintaining relationships.

A strategic approach ensures disputes are resolved efficiently without unnecessary escalation.

Dispute resolution is not just about winning; it is about protecting the project.

Choosing the right method at the right time can be the difference between controlled progress and costly disruption.

If you are currently dealing with a dispute or considering your options, getting expert guidance early can save significant time and cost. Contact us now.