As part of our DRS 50 celebrations, we are shining a light on the tutors who help shape the knowledge, capability and professionalism of those entering the dispute resolution community. Today, we speak with Neil Boothroyd, whose wide‑ranging work as a third‑party neutral and adviser informs the practical, grounded approach he brings to his teaching with DRS.
What does your day‑to‑day work in dispute resolution involve, and how does that experience inform the teaching you deliver through DRS?
Day to day, my time is divided between acting as a third‑party neutral — whether as an Adjudicator, Arbitrator, Mediator, Expert Determiner or Expert Witness — and advising clients on conflict avoidance and dispute management. Staying up to date with legal and technical developments is essential to provide a reliable and informed service.
This combination of roles gives me a rounded perspective on both presenting and deciding disputes. When teaching through DRS, I draw on real examples from practice to bring the material to life and make the learning practical, relevant and easier for candidates to apply in their own work.
What does your work with DRS involve, and do you have any highlights from your work with DRS?
My main role with DRS is as module leader for Module 2 on the RICS Construction Adjudication Diploma, which covers the law of adjudication. A particular highlight is the seminar day, where I explore the core principles with candidates using key case law and practical examples. Meeting practitioners, discussing their questions and hearing their industry experiences makes the module engaging and rewarding.
In your view, what makes education around dispute resolution valuable for practitioners in today’s built environment landscape?
For me, two elements make dispute resolution education essential today:
1. Culture – Well‑informed practitioners are more likely to frame issues constructively, focus on what genuinely matters and maintain relationships. Good education helps people avoid disputes through effective contract administration and open, transparent communication with clients and the supply chain.
2. Capability – Understanding procedure, evidence and timeframes — and knowing when to seek help — leads to better, more efficient outcomes. It reduces the cost, time and uncertainty associated with disputes.
Can you share an example of how your work with DRS contributes to raising standards, improving practice, or supporting better outcomes in dispute resolution?
The seminar sessions on Module 2 of the RICS Diploma provide an excellent forum to discuss real examples of adjudication practice. We regularly explore what effective submissions look like, how to prepare robust evidence, and how to focus on the issues that truly matter. These discussions reinforce RICS guidance and help practitioners develop clearer, more disciplined approaches to dispute resolution and conflict avoidance.
Looking ahead, how do you see dispute resolution evolving?
I expect dispute resolution to continue moving toward proportionate, early issue‑narrowing and more active case management to eliminate unnecessary cost and complexity. Guidance around the use of AI and digital tools for parties and decision makers will also become increasingly important. A review of adjudication legislation — including codifying key principles and widening its scope — would be valuable. I also anticipate growth in evaluative mediation, conciliation and early neutral evaluation as parties look to retain greater control over a resolution outcome.