Interim binding processes for major project disputes

Expanded availability

Statutory adjudication was introduced to Canada in 2019 and was initially available only for projects located in Ontario under the province’s Construction Act. In 2022, Alberta and Saskatchewan enacted their own statutory adjudication regimes.

Two recent changes have expanded the availability of statutory adjudication in Canada:

• Federal projects. In December 2023, the Federal Prompt Payment for Construction Work Act came into force, which introduced statutory adjudication for construction projects on federally owned lands.
• Ontario projects. In January 2026, amendments to the Construction Act expanded Ontario’s adjudication regime, allowing parties to select private arbitrators to decide adjudications (formerly, Construction Act adjudications were conducted exclusively by adjudicators from a roster maintained by the Ontario Dispute Adjudication for Construction Contracts (ODACC)). The amendments also allow for adjudications to be commenced up to 90 days after contract completion, expanding their availability for post-construction disputes.

Canada’s growing focus on nation-building projects is likely to lead to more construction projects on federal lands, which will be subject to the federal adjudication process.

For projects in Ontario, the ability to commence disputes in the completion phase of construction is likely to expand parties’ use of statutory adjudication. The ability to appoint arbitrators from the private arbitration bar, where there is deep infrastructure expertise, is likely to make statutory adjudication attractive for resolving disputes which arise on complex infrastructure projects.

In 2025, the total value of statutory adjudications in Ontario increased by over 20%, from $171 million in 2024 to over $205.5 million in claims filed in 2025¹.

What is interim adjudication?

Real-time dispute resolution can play a significant role in keeping construction projects on budget and on schedule. For most construction disputes, courts can rarely deliver resolution quickly enough to keep pace with the speed of construction—and leaving dispute resolution until the end of a project can create uncertainty for project proponents.

Interim binding adjudication emerged as an industry-specific solution to provide quick and efficient binding decisions during construction. The “interim” binding nature of adjudication decisions means that the parties can litigate the issue again, if they wish, after construction is complete, using longer and more traditional dispute processes (e.g., the courts or arbitration). In many cases, however, the interim decision is sufficient for the parties’ needs and becomes the final decision.

Parties have been using contractual interim adjudication mechanisms on complex projects for some time. The introduction and expansion of statutory adjudication creates opportunities to access interim adjudication in situations where project agreements do not provide for it, or where the contractual process does not fit the situation.

What are the benefits of interim adjudication?

Contractual and statutory adjudication has several benefits:

• Speed. Adjudications are quick. In Ontario, statutory adjudications can provide interim binding decisions in as little as 35 days. For complex disputes, parties can agree to extend timelines; however, the speed of adjudication outstrips nearly all court timelines, and most arbitration timelines.
• Flexible process. Adjudications are intended to be efficient. As a result, the parties can select dispute processes to suit the complexity of the issue, ranging from the exchange of written submissions to hearings with witness testimony.
• Specialized decision-makers. Adjudicators are drawn either from a roster of qualified adjudicators (such as the ODACC) or selected by the parties. As a result, the decision-maker has specialized construction expertise, and is familiar with the contracting models and the issues likely to arise mid-construction.

Contracting around adjudication

The general rule is that parties cannot contract out of statutory adjudication, unless the statute provides for it; however, parties can contract around statutory adjudication. For example, parties can design a tailored contractual adjudication mechanism which they can access for more complex disputes, while preserving the general ability to access statutory adjudication if needed. Alternatively, parties can integrate interim adjudications into final binding arbitration, with arbitrations following either immediately after an adjudication or at the end of a project as a binding process to resolve multiple interim decisions made during the construction phase of the project.