In the UK construction industry, dispute resolution refers to the range of structured processes designed to resolve disagreements between contracting parties without having to go to court and resorting to litigation.

These processes can include negotiation, mediation, adjudication or arbitration, and all options are intended to provide a clear path for resolving disagreements arising from issues such as project delivery, payment, variations, delays and other matters.

No matter what type of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is chosen, one thing remains a crucial necessity: cooperation from both parties.

At Novus Resolve, we are experienced in commercial management, dispute avoidance, all forms of formal dispute resolution, including ADR, and provide expert witness services. We understand how construction disputes arise, why cooperation can break down, and how quickly unresolved issues can escalate into costly and disruptive conflicts.

In this blog, we’ll explore why parties may refuse to cooperate during dispute resolution, the options available under UK construction contracts and legislation, and how early, informed action can help protect project outcomes, cashflow and commercial relationships.

Understanding why the other party is refusing to engage is an important first step in deciding how best to respond and which resolution route is likely to be most effective.

So, why does non-cooperation occur? A lack of cooperation during dispute resolution is rarely random. In most cases, it stems from a combination of commercial pressure, contractual misunderstanding and human factors.

In some situations, non-cooperation arises from a misunderstanding of contractual obligations. One party may not fully appreciate their responsibilities, notice requirements or response timeframes under the contract, leading to delayed or incomplete engagement.

In other cases, non-cooperation is driven by a fear of admitting liability. Parties may avoid discussions or withhold information as a defensive strategy, concerned that early engagement could be seen as accepting fault or weakening their commercial position.

There are also instances where non-cooperation is a deliberate tactic. Strategic stalling is sometimes used to apply commercial pressure, for example, by straining the other party’s cashflow, prolonging uncertainty, or forcing concessions through delay.

Practical issues can also play a role in non-cooperation, as poor document management or internal disorganisation may mean a party cannot respond effectively because they lack the records, clarity or authority needed to engage in the process.

Finally, personality clashes or a breakdown in working relationships can escalate tensions and harden positions. When trust has eroded, even well-structured dispute resolution processes can become difficult without external support.

When faced with non‑cooperation, your first point of reference should always be the contractual dispute resolution provisions agreed at the outset.

Most standard UK construction contracts, including NEC and JCT, contain dispute resolution clauses that set out specific escalation pathways and timeframes for responding to notices and submissions. These clauses typically cover formal steps such as notification, negotiation, referral to ADR, and, sometimes, arbitration or court proceedings.

Contracts will often include escalation paths requiring senior representatives to meet early to try to resolve issues before formal processes begin, and strict timeframes for responses at each stage.

Even if the other party refuses to cooperate informally, the contract itself usually provides mechanisms for enforcement, helping keep the process moving. Interpreting and implementing these contractual provisions effectively is something Novus Resolve can assist with, reducing ambiguity and helping you exercise your rights under the agreement.

Even when one party refuses to engage or actively participate in discussions, the UK construction industry provides robust legal and contractual mechanisms to ensure disputes can still progress.

Here are some of the formal mechanisms available that do not rely on the other party’s willingness to engage:

4.1 Adjudication (Construction Act 1996)

Under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, any party to a qualifying construction contract has a statutory right to refer a dispute to adjudication.

Adjudication is designed to be a fast, interim process where a neutral adjudicator makes a decision based on the evidence submitted, typically within 28 days of the referral.

The process proceeds even if one party does not fully participate, and the adjudicator’s decision is binding on an interim basis and enforceable in the courts if necessary.

4.2 Expert determination

Expert determination involves a neutral specialist assessing a specific issue, often technical matters such as valuation or delay quantum, and issuing a decision. Whether this decision is binding depends on the contractual wording.

If the parties have agreed in the contract that an expert’s decision is binding, it usually can be enforced. This method can be useful when technical clarity is needed, and one side is reluctant to engage in broader negotiation.

4.3 Arbitration

Under the Arbitration Act 2025, disputes can be referred to arbitration, which is a private, structured process similar to court but with more flexibility. Once begun, an arbitral tribunal has the power to proceed and make a final award even if one party refuses to actively participate.

The procedural rules typically allow the tribunal to set default steps so that a lack of cooperation does not halt progress.

4.4 Court action as a last resort
If a dispute cannot be resolved through ADR, it may escalate to court proceedings, typically in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) or other civil courts. Courts can enforce compliance, award damages and sanction parties that refuse to participate in good faith.

Non-cooperation not only increases financial and operational burdens but can also harm commercial relationships and reputations, underscoring why early engagement and constructive participation in ADR are usually the most effective routes.

Before resorting to formal processes, there are practical steps you can take to encourage the other party to engage, including:

• Clear and structured communication – Present issues logically with supporting evidence to reduce misunderstandings and build confidence in your position. Consistent, professional communication can prevent minor issues from escalating.

• Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) – You could involve an independent expert providing a non-binding view on likely outcomes. This gives both parties a reality check and can encourage early settlement discussions.

• Providing missing information – Ensure the other party has all relevant documentation or clarifications they may be waiting for. Addressing these gaps removes excuses for delay and keeps the process moving.

• Involving a neutral third party early – Engaging a mediator or facilitator can defuse tension and open dialogue about mutually acceptable solutions. Early intervention often prevents disputes from escalating.

• Highlighting risks of non-cooperation – Clearly explain the potential consequences, including escalating costs, adverse costs orders or reputational damage. Awareness of these risks can motivate more constructive engagement.
  

At Novus Resolve, we can assist in resetting the communication process, managing expectations, and identifying leverage points to move a stalled dispute forward without immediately resorting to formal remedies.

When one party refuses to cooperate, the consequences extend beyond the dispute. For example, cashflow strain can occur when interim payments or valuations are withheld, thereby damaging liquidity.

Other potential impacts include:

• Programme delays – Disputes can push back key milestones, disrupt delivery sequences and slow overall project progress.

• Resource diversion – Management and team members are pulled away from productive tasks to focus on dispute handling, which can affect other projects and operational efficiency.

• Contractual non-compliance – Ignored notices and deadlines can complicate your ability to enforce rights under the contract later.

• Strained commercial relationships – Tensions with clients, contractors and supply chain partners can grow, increasing the likelihood of further disputes and eroding trust.

When disputes stall due to non‑cooperation, Novus Resolve are here to support you with commercial management and contract interpretation, ensuring that your rights and obligations are clearly understood and exercised. We assist in claims preparation and defence, crafting submissions that comply with contract rules and statutory requirements.

For complex matters, our delay and quantum analysis provides robust evidence to strengthen your position, and our expert witness services offer independent, credible technical perspectives.

With a team of Chartered Quantity Surveyors and experience on major UK and international projects, Novus Resolve has a strong track record of helping clients navigate even the most challenging disputes.

Want to avoid non-cooperation altogether? Here’s a quick checklist we’ve compiled to help minimise the risk of non-cooperation on your projects:

• Well‑structured contracts – Ensure contracts clearly define roles, responsibilities and dispute resolution pathways. You can also include practical avoidance and escalation clauses to reduce ambiguity.

• Early commercial advice – Seek guidance on dispute avoidance language and proactive strategies before work begins.

• Consistent record‑keeping and notice compliance – Maintain accurate site diaries, correspondence, meeting minutes and variation records to create a clear evidential basis if issues arise.

• Early involvement of independent experts – Use expert determination or Conflict Avoidance Panels (CAPs) to resolve technical or complex issues before they escalate.

• Clear communication protocols – Establish structured reporting, regular progress updates and defined escalation pathways to reduce misunderstandings and maintain engagement.

By following these practices, you can create a proactive framework that reduces friction, keeps all parties aligned and ensures that minor issues are addressed before they escalate into formal disputes.

Even if the other side refuses to cooperate, the UK construction industry has robust mechanisms to keep dispute resolution moving. From statutory adjudication to arbitration and contractual enforcement through the courts, there are options to ensure that disputes do not grind your project to a halt.

However, the earlier you seek professional advice, the more opportunity there is to resolve matters efficiently and preserve commercial relationships. If you’re dealing with a stalled dispute or an uncooperative party, speak to Novus Resolve today – we will provide you with clear strategic advice and a proactive route forward.