Conflict Avoidance, Management and Dispute Resolution — RICS APC Revision Guide

Adjudication is a statutory, time-limited process (28 days from referral) that produces a temporarily binding decision — used widely in construction disputes. Arbitration is a private, final, and binding process governed by an arbitration clause and the Arbitration Act 1996. Litigation is court-based, public, and final but slower and more expensive. The right choice depends on the contract terms, the value of the dispute, confidentiality requirements, and whether an ongoing relationship needs to be preserved.

The RICS Conflict Avoidance and Dispute Resolution in Construction guidance note sets out the principles and practical steps for avoiding disputes through collaborative practices, early warning systems, and clear contractual arrangements. It also provides a framework for choosing and operating the appropriate dispute resolution procedure when conflict cannot be avoided. Candidates should be familiar with its core structure and able to reference it when asked to justify a recommended dispute resolution approach.

Expert determination is a private, binding process in which an independent expert — often a chartered surveyor — is appointed to decide a specific technical question, such as a rent review or boundary dispute. Unlike arbitration, the expert acts on their own knowledge and is not restricted to the evidence presented by the parties (unless the contract specifies otherwise). It is faster and cheaper than arbitration for narrow technical questions, and the decision is final and binding with very limited grounds for challenge.

Conflict avoidance is proactive — using early warning notices, risk registers, regular project meetings, and clear contract administration to prevent disputes from crystallising. Dispute resolution is reactive — applying formal procedures after a dispute has arisen. Good professional practice prioritises avoidance. At Level 3, assessors expect you to advise clients that the cheapest dispute is the one that never happens, and to explain the specific mechanisms a project team can use to achieve that.

You advise the client that a blanket rejection without substantive assessment increases the risk of adjudication and weakens their position if the matter is referred. The correct approach is to carry out a detailed assessment of each head of claim against the contract entitlement and contemporaneous records, respond in writing with reasoned acceptance or rejection of each element, and open without-prejudice discussions if there is common ground. A negotiated settlement, even at a figure above your initial assessment, will almost always be cheaper than adjudication. You document your advice and the client's instruction at every stage.