Statutory adjudication has been enacted progressively throughout Australia on a state-by-state basis over a period of 10 years. The legislation with more emphasis on the Eastern States has come under much criticism recently for failing to facilitate decisions of sufficient quality with respect to complex adjudications. This paper reviews this criticism and discusses the key causes of the unsatisfactory outcome of complex adjudications in Australia. The identified causes are namely flawed appointment, relaxed eligibility and regulation, intimidation of adjudicators, fuzzy jurisdictional boundaries, abbreviated timeframes, limited inquisitorial powers and want of review mechanism. The implication of the research is a better understanding of the nature of the quality of complex adjudication outcome and the relevant worthwhile reform opportunities in Australia, especially with regard to introducing legislative review mechanisms.

Statutory adjudication has been enacted progressively throughout Australia on a state-by-state basis over a period of 10 years starting in 1999. The first Australian jurisdiction to introduce statutory adjudication was New South Wales (NSW) by virtue of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999. Despite the many differences between all of the Acts in Australia, they can be broadly grouped on the basis of similarity into the East Coast model Acts (including New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria, South Australia, Tasmania and Australian Capital