Critchlow was plain. Capper completely agreed that the meaning of the word was laid down in law and was fully understood, but he argued that the law of contract allowed the meaning of a word to be part of a party's own dictionary. He was absolutely right. Freedom to contract is under fire but not yet sunk. Nor did Critchlow disagree.
Contract is powerful and contracting parties have significant freedoms.
But he said that the change or temporary change in the word's meaning ran counter to the adjudication rules in the Construction Act and must fall. He is right, and he is wrong. The ICE standard form document contains a perfectly lawful dispute management device, which I call ICE adjudication. It is contractually sound. No court will strike it down.