Where arbitrators have decided the choice of an umpire by tossing up, the acquiescence of parties, subsequently to the choice, and before the reference is proceeded in, does not render the appointment valid, unless the parties acquiescing have knowledge of all the circumstances under which the choice was made. Therefore, where one of two arbitrators objected to S. as umpire, and afterwards the two arbitrators tossed up, and the other arbitrator won, and named S, and the attorney of one of the parties, knowing that the arbitrators had tossed up, but not knowing that one of them had objected to S, proceeded in the reference, it was held that the irregularity was not cured. And this, though the ground of the arbitrator’s objection to S. was negatived by affidavit.
Citations:
[1836] EngR 667, (1836) 4 Ad and E 945, (1836) 111 ER 1039
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Arbitration
Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.314999