Henry Boot Construction (UK) Limited v Malmaison Hotel (Manchester) Limited: CA 25 May 2000

Where a party appealed against an arbitration to the County or High Court, the court which gave judgment was the sole body able to give permission to enter an appeal under the Act. An appellate court did not have jurisdiction to give leave to appeal.
The courts presume that Parliament does not intend an implied repeal.
Swinton Thomas, Waller, Arden LJJ
Times 31-Aug-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 175, [2001] QB 388
Arbitration Act 1996 69(8)
England and Wales
Appeal fromHenry Boot Construction v Malmaison Hotel (Manchester) Ltd TCC 1999
. .
CitedGeogas SA v Trammo Gas Ltd (The Baleares) HL 1991
Charterers had appealed an arbitration award. The judge set it aside. The CA gave leave and allowed the appeal saying that as a question of mixed fact and law sought leave to appeal against an arbitration award.
Held: The House had no . .

Cited by:
CitedNorth Range Shipping Ltd v Seatrans Shipping Corporation CA 14-Mar-2002
The parties had been involved in an arbitration. The claimant sought leave to appeal. The judge refused to give leave, but did not say exactly why.
Held: Human Rights law required a right of appeal. That right could only be exercised properly . .
CitedAthletic Union of Constantinople v National Basketball Association and Others CA 28-May-2002
A party had been refused leave to appeal against an arbitration under the Act by the judge, but later obtained leave to appeal.
Held: Such leave could only be granted by the trial judge, and the Court of Appeal could set aside the leave . .
CitedCetelem Sa v Roust Holdings Ltd CA 24-May-2005
The parties were engaged in arbitration proceedings. The claimant had sought and obtained an interim mandatory order intended to prevent the defendant dissipating its assets in anticipation of an adverse ruling. The defendant sought leave to appeal. . .
CitedSumukan Ltd v The Commonwealth Secretariat CA 21-Mar-2007
The appellants sought to challenge a finding that they had by their contract with the defendants excluded the right to appeal to a court on a point of law. The defendants replied that the appeal court had no jurisdiction to hear such an appeal.
CitedBH and Another v The Lord Advocate and Another SC 20-Jun-2012
The appellants wished to resist their extradition to the US to face criminal charges for drugs. As a married couple that said that the extraditions would interfere with their children’s rights to family life.
Held: The appeals against . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.147208