This paper looks at the rise in the use of statutory adjudication in various jurisdictions in the context of complex construction disputes and asks if the United States is now ready to also embrace this ADR option. Statutory Adjudication has taken off in the United Kingdom, Ireland, Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand, Malaysia, and Australia. Most recently, the Federal Prompt Payment for Construction Work Act and the Canadian Construction Act (2018) have introduced adjudication in Ontario, Canada. While the United States gave the world the concept of dispute review boards (DRBs) (first used in 1975 with the second bore of the Eisenhower Tunnel at Loveland Pass, Colorado) it has not embraced statutory adjudication.

The authors consider that there are compelling reasons and inflammatory markers that indicate that the United States is now ready to embrace statutory adjudication in the context of construction contracts—but the United States needs to decide if statutory adjudication ought to apply to all disputes that arise in complex construction contracts (as in the United Kingdom) or be limited to solely payment disputes (as in Ireland); decide if statutory adjudication is limited to disputes that arise prior to practical or substantial completion; and codify how enforcement of adjudicators' decisions would work in practice.