A sub-contract between Lanes and Galliford Try did not go well. Galliford terminated it before the works were completed. Lanes cried foul. This resulted in a number of adjudications. In one adjudication, the adjudicator issued his “Preliminary View” to both parties before he had received any documents from Lanes. Both parties commented on his “Preliminary View” and sent him further documents. The adjudicator awarded Galliford approximately £1.3 million. Lanes refused to pay. Lanes raised a number of arguments, one being that the adjudicator was or appeared to be biased because he reached his “Preliminary View” before he had considered any of Lanes’ arguments. The Court of Appeal did not agree (Lanes Group PLC v Galliford Try Infrastructure Limited (CA (Civ Div) 2011)). It decided that the “Preliminary View” was intended to assist the parties. It was part of the “rough and ready process”. Therefore, it would appear that the bar for setting aside an adjudicator’s decision remains high. If you do intend to raise this type of argument, it’s probably best to shout loudly as early as possible. If not, your chances of succeeding are likely to be slim!