Assessing the Legal and Institutional Challenges in the Enforcement of Adjudication Decisions in Construction Industry in Tanzania: A Comparative Study with the United Kingdom

This article critically examines the legal and institutional challenges affecting the enforcement of construction adjudication decisions in Tanzania, using the United Kingdom as a comparative reference. It focuses on the gap between the use of adjudication under construction contracts and institutional rules and the absence of a coherent statutory framework that expressly establishes the legal effect of decisions and a direct, expedited enforcement route. The article adopts doctrinal and comparative legal research methods, analysing relevant legislation, procedural rules, judicial decisions and legal literature in the two jurisdictions. The analysis identifies five interconnected issues: uncertainty over the status and binding effect of adjudication decisions; the lack of a dedicated enforcement procedure; the risk that enforcement proceedings may become a reconsideration of the underlying dispute; insufficiently defined institutional responsibilities and professional standards; and the need to coordinate adjudication with arbitration and litigation. The United Kingdom framework, particularly the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, the Scheme for Construction Contracts and the courts’ enforcement approach, illustrates how statutory recognition and focused judicial supervision can preserve adjudication’s intended speed while retaining safeguards for jurisdictional and natural-justice defects. The article argues that Tanzania should adopt a context-sensitive statutory framework defining the scope of adjudication, the legal effect of decisions, enforcement procedure, limited grounds of challenge and the roles of relevant institutions. These reforms would improve legal certainty and the practical utility of adjudication in the construction industry.