Receiving a favourable adjudicator’s decision often feels like the finish line. 

After weeks of preparing submissions, reviewing evidence, and navigating a 28-day adjudication framework, it is entirely understandable to view the decision as the end of the dispute.  

In reality, I frequently see that it is only the beginning.  

The real challenge starts when the losing party refuses to pay and enforcement proceedings in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) become a reality. 

For many developers, contractors, and commercial directors, the instinct is simple: we have won, so we must enforce. 

Legally, that may well be the correct course. Commercially, it is not always wise.  

In my practice, I advise that the better question is not whether you can enforce an adjudicator’s decision, but whether enforcement is your best commercial option. 

That is where assessing your Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement, your BATNA, becomes invaluable. 

Do Not Let the Sunk-Cost Fallacy Drive the Decision

By the time an adjudicator issues a decision, considerable time, management effort, and legal costs have already been invested. 

It is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that, having come this far, you have no option but to press ahead with enforcement.  

In my experience, that can be an expensive mistake.  

An enforcement judgment is only as valuable as your ability to recover the debt. 

Before issuing proceedings, instructing counsel, or incurring further legal costs, I ask my clients a straightforward question: what does recovery actually look like in practice?  

If the opposing party is facing serious financial difficulty, aggressive enforcement may simply accelerate an insolvency process without improving your prospects of recovery. 

You may succeed in court, yet recover very little while wasting corporate timeline and resources.  

Winning on paper is not the same as improving your commercial position.

Shift Your Focus to Commercial Reality

During the adjudication process itself, my focus is internal: contracts, schedules, and contemporaneous records. 

Once the decision has been issued, the focus must change. 

The question is no longer whether you were contractually right; it is whether your opponent can, or will, comply.  

I look at three specific criteria during a sensible BATNA assessment:

• Financial position: Does the counterparty have the liquidity to satisfy the judgment, or is there a genuine insolvency risk?  

• Cost of delay: Although TCC enforcement applications are dealt with quickly, continued litigation still consumes management time and disrupts project cash flow.  

• Enforcement risk: The TCC operates on a “pay now, argue later” philosophy. However, a credible jurisdictional challenge or a serious breach of natural justice may prevent summary enforcement. 

Strategic Negotiation as Leverage

Holding an enforceable adjudicator’s decision gives you significant leverage. 

In many instances, that leverage is far more valuable than immediate litigation.  

The realistic prospect of TCC enforcement often encourages meaningful settlement discussions. Where both parties must still work together to complete a live project, preserving the commercial relationship is a critical factor.  

In my work, I find that strategic negotiation is not a sign of weakness. When deployed with precision, it is often the quickest route to securing payment and protecting your margins. 

Aligning Legal Strategy with Project Objectives

An adjudicator’s decision is a powerful mechanism, but it should not dictate your next step. Every enforcement path must begin with a clear assessment of your alternatives and the commercial outcome you intend to achieve.  

Under the Direct Public Access rules, businesses can instruct a specialist construction barrister directly without the intermediate cost of a solicitor. 

Obtaining early specialist advice helps identify litigation risks, assess enforcement prospects, and strengthen your negotiating position before further costs are incurred.  

The strongest commercial outcome is rarely achieved by rushing into court. 

True leverage comes from holding an enforceable decision, understanding your commercial reality, and knowing precisely when litigation protects you, and when negotiation delivers the result. 

If you are dealing with an unpaid adjudicator’s decision or considering enforcement options, I would be happy to discuss this further if it applies to your project.