Tag: Arbitration

Micula and Others v Romania: ComC 15 Jun 2017

Claimant’s application for security or leave to appeal.
Held: Leave given.

Judges:

Blair J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1430 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Micula and Others v Romania and Another ComC 20-Jan-2017
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Micula and Others v Romania CA 27-Jul-2018
Enforcement of an arbitration award given in accordance with the procedure laid down in the International Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States . .
At ComC (2) – Micula and Others v Romania SC 19-Feb-2020
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.588924

Micula and Others v Romania: CA 27 Jul 2018

Enforcement of an arbitration award given in accordance with the procedure laid down in the International Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States

Judges:

Lady Justice Arden
Lord Justice Hamblen
And
Lord Justice Leggatt

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 1801, [2019] Bus LR 1394, [2018] WLR(D) 496

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Micula and Others v Romania and Another ComC 20-Jan-2017
. .
Appeal from – Micula and Others v Romania ComC 15-Jun-2017
Claimant’s application for security or leave to appeal.
Held: Leave given. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, International

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.620470

Ocean Marine Navigation Ltd v Koch Carbon Inc (‘The Dynamic’): ComC 31 Jul 2003

The arbitrator had held in favour of the charterers that the owners were limited to damages and could not claim hire. The owners appealed.
Held: The arbitrator had not applied the law correctly in rejecting the owners’ claim to hire, and he remitted the award.

Judges:

Simon J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 1936 (Comm), [2003] 2 Lloyds Rep 693

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Attica Sea Carriers Corporation v Ferrostaal Poseidon Bulk Reederei GmbH, The Puerto Buitrago CA 1976
The parties entered into a charterparty by demise of a bulk carrier. It was in a state of disrepair. The owners required the charterers to repair it before redelivery, and claimed hire losses until it was returned repaired. The extensive repairs . .

Cited by:

Cited – Reichman and Another v Beveridge CA 13-Dec-2006
The defendants were tenants of the claimant. They vacated the premises and stopped paying the rent. The claimant sought payment of the arrears of rent. The defendants said that the claimants should have taken steps to reduce their damages by seeking . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Transport

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185067

Artegodan v Commission: ECFI 26 Nov 2002

ECJ Medicinal products for human use – Community arbitration procedures – Withdrawal of marketing authorisations – Competence – Criteria for withdrawal – Anorectics: amfepramone, clobenzorex, fenproporex, norpseudoephedrine, phentermine – Directives 65/65/EEC and 75/319/EEC.

Citations:

T-74/00, [2002] EUECJ T-74/00, [2002] ECR 11-495

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

See Also – Artegodan v Commission ECFI 28-Jun-2000
. .
See Also – Commission v Artegodan and others ECJ 24-Jul-2003
. .
See Also – Artegodan v Commission ECFI 5-Sep-2001
. .
See Also – Commission v Artegodan and others (Order) ECJ 8-May-2003
. .

Cited by:

Cited – British American Tobacco UK Ltd and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health Admn 5-Nov-2004
The claimants challenged the validity of regulations restricting cigarette advertisements, saying that greater exceptions should have been allowed, and that the regulations infringed their commercial right of free speech.
Held: The Regulations . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Commercial, Arbitration

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178574

Chuck v Cremer: 9 Feb 1848

Where an action is referred by an order at nisi prius this Court has no jurisdiction to interfere with the certificate of the referee or the judgment entered to pursuant thereto, on any ground on which it would not have such jurisdiction if the judgment had been obtained in the ordinary course upon the verdict of a jury

Citations:

[1848] EngR 256, (1846-1848) 2 Ph 477, (1848) 41 ER 1028

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Chuck v Cremer 24-Jul-1846
The plaintiff’s solicitor obtained an attachment against the defendant in default of a pleaded defence, disregarding a court order extending the period for filing the defence, which he considered to be a nullity. The order in question had been . .
See Also – Chuck v Cremer 19-Nov-1846
A party in contempt may give a notice of motion, although he cannot move until the contempt of court is cleared. With referance to clearing contempt the answer must be taken be sufficient until exceptions are actually allowed.
Moving upon the . .
See Also – Chuck v Cremer ([1846] EngR 1155) 1-Dec-1846
A party, who knows of a null or irregular order, should apply to discharge it. Whilst such an order is in existence it must not be disobeyed. . .
See Also – Chuck v Cremer ([1846] EngR 1154) 1-Dec-1846
An order of the court of which the party affected by it has notice, though not formally served upon him is not to be disregarded or treated by him as a nullity, however certain it may be that the order is erroneous, and would, upon a proper . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.299806

Capital Trust Investment Limited v Radio Design AB and others: CA 15 Feb 2002

The claimant appealed an order staying its action on the basis that the agreement between the parties provided for arbitration in Sweden. Shares had been purchased, and the claimant said that because of misrepresentations by the respondent, they had paid six times the true value. There had been a Confidential Information Memorandum upon which both parties would wish to rely. The form applying for shares had been prepared by a placement agent and included an arbitration clause. The respondent argued that that contract was with the agents, not the respondent.
Held: The form created a contract between the parties. The additional question arose as to whether a claim for damages for negligent or fraudulent misrepresentation fell within the ambit of the arbitration clause. An arbitration or jurisdiction clause is very different from a general release, and the BCCI case was distinguished. It would be unhelpful to allow two sets of proceedings, and nor had the respondent taken any step in the proceedings to waive the right to arbitration. Appeal dismissed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Schiemann, Lord Justice Clarke, And, Lady Justice Arden

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 135

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1996 9(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Ali, Khan and others (No 1); BCCI v Ali HL 1-Mar-2001
Cere Needed Releasing Future Claims
A compromise agreement which appeared to claim to settle all outstanding claims between the employee and employer, did not prevent the employee later claiming for stigma losses where, at the time of the agreement, the circumstances which might lead . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167624

Korda v ITF Ltd, Trading As the International Tennis Federation: ChD 4 Feb 1999

Decisions of the International Tennis Federation anti-doping appeals committee are not appealable to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. The appeal system was intended to be final, and the rules agreed by the competitor bound him and the federation.

Citations:

Times 04-Feb-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.82831

CMS Dolphin Ltd v Paul M Simonet and Another: ChD 23 May 2001

The claimant asserted that the defendant had, having at one point been a creative director of the claimant, left to set up an alternate competing business, and diverted business from the first company to the new one. There had been disagreements about the extent of capital to be introduced. The defendant asserted that this happened after he had been marginalised within the old company and had resigned as director at the invitation of the other partner.
Held: The power to resign is not itself a fiduciary power. A resigning director could not take to himself a business opportunity maturing within the first company. He became a constructive trustee of that maturing business opportunity. In this case the defendant had so acted. He was liable personally even though the opportunity was pursued through a second limited company.
Lawrence Collins J said: ‘In my judgment the underlying basis of the liability of a director who exploits after his resignation a maturing business opportunity of the company is that the opportunity is to be treated as if it were property of the company in relation to which the director had fiduciary duties. By seeking to exploit the opportunity after resignation he is appropriating for himself that property. He is just as accountable as a trustee who retires without properly accounting for trust property. In the case of the director he becomes a constructive trustee of the fruits of his abuse of the company’s property, which he has acquired in circumstances where he knowingly had a conflict of interest, and exploited it by resigning from the company.’

Judges:

Justice Lawrence Collins

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Ch 415, [2001] 2 BCLC 704

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Canadian Aero Service Ltd v O’Malley 1973
(Supreme Court Canada) Mr O’Malley and Dr Zarzycki were senior officers of the claimant (‘Canaero’). Having attempted, unsuccessfully, to procure a contract for Canaero to carry out a topographical survey and mapping of part of Guyana, they resigned . .
Cited – Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver HL 20-Feb-1942
Directors Liability for Actions Ouside the Company
Regal negotiated for the purchase of two cinemas in Hastings. There were five directors on the board, including Mr Gulliver, the chairman. Regal incorporated a subsidiary, Hastings Amalgamated Cinemas Ltd, with a share capital of 5,000 pounds. There . .
Cited – Imperial Mercantile Credit Association v Coleman HL 1873
Where a company director puts the benefit of a company contract into a partnership, he is fully accountable even if his partners are entitled to part of the profit and are ignorant of his breach of fiduciary duty. . .
See Also – Profilati Italia SRL and Painewebber Inc v Painewebber International Futures Ltd ComC 23-Jan-2001
An award was challenged on the grounds that the successful party had failed to make proper disclosure.
Held: Moore-Bick J applied the test whether there was ‘any substantial likelihood that disclosure . . would have resulted in the tribunal . .

Cited by:

Cited – Ultraframe (UK) Ltd v Fielding and others ChD 27-Jul-2005
The parties had engaged in a bitter 95 day trial in which allegations of forgery, theft, false accounting, blackmail and arson. A company owning patents and other rights had become insolvent, and the real concern was the destination and ownership of . .
Cited – Ultraframe (UK) Ltd v Fielding and others ChD 27-Jul-2005
The parties had engaged in a bitter 95 day trial in which allegations of forgery, theft, false accounting, blackmail and arson. A company owning patents and other rights had become insolvent, and the real concern was the destination and ownership of . .
Cited – Smithkline Beecham Plc Glaxosmithkline UK Ltd and Another v Apotex Europe Ltd and others (No 2) CA 23-May-2006
The parties to the action had given cross undertakings to support the grant of an interim injunction. A third party subsequently applied to be joined, and now sought to take advantage of the cross undertakings to claim the losses incurred through . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Arbitration

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.163019

Westland Helicopters Ltd v Arab Organisation for Industrialisation: 1995

International arbitration proceedings under a joint venture agreement had led to an award in Westland’s favour against the Organisation. The award was converted into a judgment and Westland obtained garnishee orders nisi against six London banks. Colman J was faced with a claim by an Egyptian intervener to be the same as (or a successor to) the Organisation by virtue of domestic Egyptian laws. The justification for such laws was in issue but was said by the intervener to lie in an international law principle of necessity which was in turn said to be invoked by breach by the other member states setting up the Organisation of the treaty by which it was set up. Colman J held such issues to be non-justiciable.

Citations:

[1995] QB 282

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Occidental Exploration and Production Company vRepublic of Ecuador CA 9-Sep-2005
The parties had arbitrated their dispute in London under a bilateral investment treaty between the US and Ecuador. The republic sought to appeal the arbitration. The applicant now appealed an order that the English High Court had jurisdiction to . .
Cited – Regina (on the application of Abassi and Another) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Another CA 6-Nov-2002
A British national had been captured in Afghanistan, and was being held without remedy by US forces. His family sought an order requiring the respondent to take greater steps to secure his release or provide other assistance.
Held: Such an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, International

Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.230258

International Bulk Shipping and Services Ltd v The Mineral and Metals Trading Company of India; International Bulk Shipping and Services Ltd v The President of India; Himoff Maritime Enterprises Ltd v The President of India: ComC 16 Feb 1994

cw Arbitration – award – limitation period – cause of action arising – implied promise to perform award – breach – RSC Order 15 r.6 – misjoinder and non-joinder of party – principles – RSC Order 15 r.6 – joinder of party – proceedings a nullity – no power

Judges:

Waller J

Citations:

16 February 1994, Unreported, [1996] 2 Lloyds Rep 474

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Affirmed – International Bulk Shipping and Services Ltd v President of India and Another CA 11-Dec-1995
Actions to enforce arbitration awards were brought, each in the name of a ship-owning company. At the time of the arbitrations the assets of each company had vested in a trustee in bankruptcy appointed under New York law, but the trustee had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Litigation Practice

Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.182567

Stiell Ltd v Riema Control Systems Ltd: IHCS 28 Jun 2000

Contractors had been called upon to carry out work beyond that originally requested, and sought payment, and had arrested a payment in the hands of a third party. Before raising the action they had referred the matter to adjudication under the Act.
Held: The fact of the reference did not change the fact of the claim, and the effect of the arbitrator’s decision in rejecting the claim was not like that of a certifying engineer or architect.

Citations:

Times 28-Jun-2000

Statutes:

Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Arbitration, Construction, Scotland

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.89556

Channel Tunnel Group Ltd v Balfour Beatty Construction Ltd and Others: HL 17 Feb 1993

The court has the power to stay an action which pursued a remedy which was outside the terms of the arbitration agreement determining the dispute. The contract between the parties provided for disputes to be settled by arbitration in Belgium. The plaintiff sought injunctive relief from an English court. The defendant requested a stay.
Held: The 1950 Act did not give power to a court to provide injunctive relief operative over a foreign arbitration, but such was available under the 1981 Act, but the effect here would be to pre-empt the arbitration and relief was not appropriate. As to the Siskina case: ‘the doctrine of The Siskina, put at its highest, is that the right to an interlocutory injunction cannot exist in isolation, but is always incidental to and dependent on the enforcement of a substantive right, which usually although not invariably takes the shape of a cause of action’.
Lord Browne-Wilkinson: ‘Although the respondents have been validly served (i.e., there is jurisdiction in the court) and there is an alleged invasion of the appellants’ contractual rights (i.e., there is a cause of action in English law), since the final relief (if any) will be granted by the arbitrators and not by the English court, the English court, it is said, has no power to grant the interlocutory injunction. In my judgment that submission is not well founded.’ and ‘ . . the court has power to grant interlocutory relief based on a cause of action recognised by English law against a defendant duly served where such relief is ancillary to a final order whether to be granted by the English court or by some other court or abitral body.’

Judges:

Lord Browne-Wilkinson

Citations:

Gazette 17-Feb-1993, [1993] 2 WLR 262, [1993] 1 All ER 664, [1993] AC 334

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1979 1, Supreme Court Act 1981 37(1), Arbitration Act 1950 12(6)

Citing:

Cited – Siskina (owners of Cargo lately on Board) v Distos Compania Naviera SA HL 1979
An injunction was sought against a Panamanian ship-owning company to restrain it from disposing of a fund, consisting of insurance proceeds, in England. The claimant for the injunction was suing the company in a Cyprus court for damages and believed . .
Cited – Bremer Vulkan Schiffbau Und Maschinenfabrik v South India Shipping Corp Ltd HL 1981
Where both parties to a contract are in breach of a mutual obligation owed by each to the other, neither can rely upon the other’s breach as giving him a right to terminate. The Court of Appeal has an inherent power to control its own procedure to . .
Appeal from – Channel Tunnel Group Ltd and Another v Balfour Beatty Construction Ltd and Others CA 1-Apr-1992
The arbitration agreement specified that disputes were to be arbitrated in Brussels, therefore there was no jurisdiction in an English court. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Halpern and Another v Halpern and others ComC 24-Mar-2006
The deceased parents, being orthodox Jews, had first made standard wills and then made provision accoding to Jewish law. A dispute after the second death was referred to a Beth Din arbitration. After an initial resolution, various distributions were . .
Cited – Legal Services Commission v Aaronson and others QBD 24-May-2006
The Commission sought to enforce an order requiring the defendant solicitors firm to produce to it all files on which bills had not yet been submitted. The defendant said that the request was in breach of an arbitration agreement. The commission . .
Cited – Fourie v Le Roux and others HL 24-Jan-2007
The appellant, liquidator of two South African companies, had made a successful without notice application for an asset freezing order. He believed that the defendants had stripped the companies of substantial assets. The order was set aside for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.78976

Bankers Trust Company v P T Jakarta International Hotels and Development: ComC 12 Mar 1999

Where an arbitration agreement referred to an arbitration under the rules of a major international scheme, by virtue of a standard form master agreement, this was sufficient and good reason to grant an injunction to enforce the reference.
ComC Injunction restraining proceedings in a foreign court in breach of an arbitration agreement.

Judges:

Cresswell J

Citations:

Times 10-May-1999, [1999] 1 All ER (Comm) 785, [1999] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 910

Arbitration, Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78163

Astro Vencedor Compania Naviera SA v Mabanaft GmbH: CA 1971

For an arbitration clause in a contract between parties to be used to enforce arbitration of a tortious claim, the tortious claim must arise out of the contractual matters. In this case damages were sought for the wrongful arrest of a ship in consequence of an alleged breach of the contract.
Lord Denning MR said: ‘The arrest of the ship was the direct consequence of the charterers’ claim for damages against the shipowners. . The arrest was simply the follow-up to that claim. It was so closely connected with it that the rightness or wrongness of the arrest is also within the scope of the arbitration. This is borne out by the practice of the Admiralty Court. There have not been many claims for wrongful arrest recently. But the practice of the Court of Admiralty is to deal with a claim for wrongful arrest at the same time as the claim for which the arrest was made. In The Evangelismos . . the Privy Council said that such procedure is very ‘convenient’.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR

Citations:

[1971] Lloyd’s R 502, [1971] 2 QB 588

Cited by:

Cited – S Ltd v C Ltd ComC 27-Feb-2009
Defamation allegation not subject to arbitration
The parties had an agreement referring disputes between them to arbitration. One party raised an allegation of defamation, but the arbitrator refused jurisdiction. The parties had chosen the London Metal Exchange for its expertise in metals trading, . .
Cited – Aspect Contracts (Asbetos) Ltd v Higgins Construction Plc SC 17-Jun-2015
Aspect had claimed the return of funds paid by it to the appellant Higgins under an adjudication award in a construction contract disute. The claimant had been asked to prpare asbestos surveys and reports on maisonettes which Higgins was to acquire . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Transport

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.375637

Chimimport Plc v G d’Alesio SAS: 1994

The phrase ‘arising under’ in a clause referring matters to arbitration is narrower than ‘arising out of’ and the court doubted whether a tortious claim could easily give rise to a dispute ‘under the contract’.

Judges:

Rix J

Citations:

[1994] 2 Lloyd’s Law Reports 366

Cited by:

Cited – Fiona Trust and Holding Corp and others v Privalov and others ComC 20-Oct-2006
The parties disputed whether their claim should be arbitrated.
Held: A claim as to whether the contract itself had been made was not one which could be arbitrated by provisions in that contract. It does not arise ‘under’ the contract. The . .
Cited – Fiona Trust and Holding Corporation and others v Privalov and others CA 24-Jan-2007
The court was asked whether when contracts have been induced by bribery and have been rescinded on discovery of the bribery, that constitutes a dispute which can be determined by arbitration in the context of a common form of arbitration clause.
Cited – Aspect Contracts (Asbetos) Ltd v Higgins Construction Plc SC 17-Jun-2015
Aspect had claimed the return of funds paid by it to the appellant Higgins under an adjudication award in a construction contract disute. The claimant had been asked to prpare asbestos surveys and reports on maisonettes which Higgins was to acquire . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.245556

Aoot Kalmneft v Glencore International AG and Another: QBD 27 Jul 2001

When asking whether the time for appeal against an arbitrator’s award should be extended, the court should look at several circumstances, including the length of the delay; whether the party was acting reasonably in all the circumstances in delaying; whether the other party had contributed to the delay; whether other party would suffer irremediable prejudice from the delay over and above mere loss of time if the application proceeded; whether the arbitration had continued during the period of delay what impact on progress or costs might arise from the extension; the strength of the application; and whether it would be unfair to deny the applicant opportunity to have the application determined.

Judges:

Colman J

Citations:

Times 20-Nov-2001

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1996 67 68 69, Civil Procedure Rules 3.1(2)

Arbitration, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.166832

Prosser, Clerk, v Goringe: 4 May 1811

An arbitrator to whom the question of the right of two rectors to the tithe of certain lands was referred, had power to devise ail means to prevent future litigation between the parties, and to settle all matters in difference between them, and to determine what he should think fit to be done by either of the parties, touching the
matters in dispute. Held, that he did not exceed his power by awarding undivided moieties of the tithes to the two rectors.

Citations:

[1811] EngR 261, (1811) 3 Taunt 426, (1811) 128 ER 169 (B)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Ecclesiastical, Arbitration

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.339345

Danae Air Transport Sa v Air Canada: ComC 8 Feb 1999

Where an arbitrator made a mathematical error in his decision, that error was one of fact or law, and it was not possible for the high court to remit the case to the arbitrator for re-consideration. The old section’s ambit is too narrow to permit this.
ComC Award – attacked for error in arithmetic in comparing open offer and value of award – whether such error is fact or law – whether award can be remitted or set aside – President of India v Jadranska followed.

Judges:

Longmore J

Citations:

Times 31-Mar-1999, Gazette 14-Apr-1999, [1999] 1 All ER (Comm), [1999] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 105

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1979 1(1), Arbitration Act 1950 22

Cited by:

Appeal from – Danae Air Transport Societie Anonyme v Air Canada CA 29-Jul-1999
The court had power to remit a case to the arbitrator for reconsideration where there appeared to be a simple mathematical error in the award, even though the error was not admitted either by the arbitrator or by the party who had benefited from the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.79788

Cleveland Structural Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd v Advanced Specialist Treatment Engineering Ltd: ComC 7 Feb 2000

An arbitration claim is said to be commenced when the claim is filed, and not when served. Because of this the respondents to an appeal in such proceedings were to be allowed to see the papers filed in support of an application for leave to appeal, as persons who were an interested party in such an application.
ComC Circumstances in which there may be inspection of arbitration claim forms filed in the Commercial Court Registry which have not yet been served on the respondent. Application of CPR 5-4(1) and (2).

Judges:

Colman J

Citations:

Times 07-Feb-2000, [2000] 1 WLR 558, [2000] 2 All ER (Comm) 189

Arbitration, Litigation Practice

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.79219

The National Insurance and Guarantee Corporation Ltd v M Young Legal Services Ltd: 2004

In an urgent case, the court can make an order under section 44(3) notwithstanding that it involved making at least some determination of the rights of the parties under a contract in which the parties had agreed that the determination of their rights should be submitted to arbitration.

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2972 (QB)

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1996 44(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Cetelem 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. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.226191

Aoot Kalmnefv v Gencore International: 27 Jul 2001

‘Further, intervention under Section 68 should be invoked only in a clear case of serious irregularity. The court’s powers to interfere with an arbitrator’s discretionary decision as to how he should exercise his discretion under Section 30(1) should not be engaged unless it is clear that in exercising his discretion he has failed to have regard to the relevant facts and to his duty under Section 33. Unless he has arrived at a conclusion which no reasonable arbitrator could have arrived at in the case in question having regard to his duties under Section 33, it cannot be said that his decision is capable of being characterised as a serious irregularity.’

Judges:

Colman J

Citations:

Unreported, 27 July 2001

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1986 68

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Newfield Construction Limited v Tomlinson, Tomlinson TCC 10-Nov-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.221024

Metalfer Corporation v Pan Ocean Shipping Co Ltd: ComC 7 Oct 1997

ComC Reference to arbitration to be within 30 days of completion of voyage – whether incorporated into charterparty – whether barring any further claim in court – whether express arbitration clause to prevail over Hague Rules, Article III, rule 6 incorporated by clause paramount.

Judges:

Longmore J

Citations:

[1998] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 632, [1997] CLC 1574

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.220802

Hayton S A v Jail SPA: ComC 16 Sep 1997

ComC Appeal from award. Leave granted. Duty to prosecute appeal and any necessary remission ‘with all deliberate speed’. Relevant principles discussed. Importance of finality. Appeal struck out not withstanding absence of prejudice.

Judges:

Clarke J

Citations:

Unreported, 16 September 1997

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.220794

Living Waters Christian Centres Ltd v Fetherstonehaugh: ComC 26 Sep 1997

Rent review. Whether misconduct by reason of the admission of hearsay evidence and evidence not proved by affidavit in non-compliance with previous procedural directions. Circumstances in which evidence of comparable inadmissible as hearsay. Distinction between weight and admissibility.

Judges:

Colmore J

Citations:

Unreported, 26 Sep 1997

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.220797

London Export Corporation v Jubilee Coffee Roasting Co Ltd: 1958

The court considered any discretion not to enforce a valid arbitration award: ‘When the arbitration agreement has been construed and no breach of the agreed procedure found there may nevertheless arise a second and quite separate question: that is, whether, as a matter of public policy, a particular award, made pursuant to that agreed procedure, ought not to be enforced and ought, therefore, to be set aside; for an arbitrator’s award, unless set aside, entitles the beneficiary to call upon the executive power of the State to enforce it, and it is the function of the court to see that that executive power is not abused.’

Judges:

Diplock J

Citations:

[1958] 1 WLR 271

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Approved – James Laing Son and Co Ltd v Eastcheap Dried Fruit Company 1962
McNair J said: ‘An English court exercises control over the enforcement of the arbitral award as part of the lex fori, whatever the proper law of the arbitration agreement or the place where the arbitration is conducted. If a claimant wishes to . .
Cited – Soleimany v Soleimany CA 4-Mar-1998
The parties were Iranian Jews, father and son. The son arranged to export carpets from Iran in contravention of Iranian law. The father and son fell into dispute about their contracts and arranged for the issues to be resolved by the Beth Din . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.219316

Margulies Brothers Ltd v Dafnis Thomaides and Co (UK) Ltd: 1958

A court has power to amend an award to put it into a form which is enforceable.

Judges:

Diplock J

Citations:

[1958] 1 WLR 398

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Carter (T/A Michael Carter Partnership) v Harold Simpson Associates (Architects) Ltd (Jamaica) PC 14-Jun-2004
(Jamaica) A joint venture partnership dispute was referred to arbitration. Certain elements were appealed and remitted. One party claimed that the entire arbitration was deprived of legal effect.
Held: The amended award following remittal was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.198417

Profilati Italia S R L v Painewebber Incorporated, Painewebber International Futures Limited: ComC 12 Sep 2001

CS Arbitration – Award – Application to set aside award on the grounds of serious irregularity – Arbitration Act 1996 s. 68(2)(g) – whether inadvertent failure to disclose relevant documents resulted in award being procured in a way contrary to public policy – whether respondents suffered substantial injustice. Arbitration – Disclosure – Arbitration under Rules of the London Metal Exchange – duty of respondent to give disclosure – whether respondent failed to disclose relevant documents
The Applicant challenged an arbitration award made under the rules of the London Metal Exchange. They claimed that they had incurred losses through the wrongful closure of its credit line and by closing out the business between them. They claimed the award would not have been made had the defendants made full disclosure of documents which later came to light. They claimed this to be in breach of public policy rather than by fraud. This applied for the most serious of cases where justice called out for a remedy. In this case disclosure may not have included these documents, and they may not have had the substantial effect claimed. The application failed.

Judges:

Moore-Bick J

Citations:

[2001] 1 All ER 1065

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1996 68(2)(g)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration, Financial Services

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.166138

Harbour and General Works Ltd v The Environment Agency: CA 22 Oct 1999

Where parties operated under a contract which provided for arbitration provided reference was claimed within a certain time scale, the failure of one party to apply for a reference in time because he had failed to read that part of the contract was not a sufficient reason to allow an extension of time. This applied even though the term was incorporated by reference, and that such applications need not be construed strictly.

Citations:

Times 22-Oct-1999, Gazette 10-Nov-1999, [1999] BLR 409

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – J T Mackley and Company Ltd v Gosport Marina Ltd TCC 3-Jul-2002
The claimant challenged the validity of a notice to refer a case to arbitration. The respondent challenged saying that the court had no jurisdiction to hear the objection, and that such issues were to be decided by the arbitrator. The claim related . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Contract, Construction

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.81226

Grammer v Lane and Others: CA 2 Dec 1999

A partnership involving the plaintiff took a tenancy of agricutural land. The plaintiff then said that the tenency had been extended to other land. The successor to the freehold denied that extension, but served a rent demand and for repairs both ‘without prejudice’ to the question of the existence of the tenancy. Matters were referred to the arbitrator.
Held: Where there was a dispute as to the existence of an agricultural tenancy, a party could nevertheless make use of notices and procedures for the protection of the tenancy on a ‘without prejudice’ basis. Where there were statutory arbitration proceedings also, the arbitrator had the choice of delaying those proceedings pending resolution of the issues as to the existence of the tenancy, of stating a case for the county court, or declining jurisdiction.

Judges:

Peter Gibson LJ, Mance LJ, Wilson J

Citations:

Times 02-Dec-1999, Gazette 17-Dec-1999

Statutes:

Agricultural Holdings Act 1986

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Fulham, Hammersmith and Kensington Rent Tribunal, ex parte Zerek 1951
A rent tribunal could not give itself jurisdiction over an unfurnished letting. Devlin J said: ‘While they will not allow every empty threat to their jurisdiction to deter them from their proper business of fixing reasonable rents, they will . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Agriculture, Landlord and Tenant, Arbitration

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.80966

Dubai Islamic Bank Pjsc v Paymentech Merchant Services Inc: QBD 24 Nov 2000

The place of arbitration, the juridical seat, was necessarily and inherently established at the time when an arbitration began, and could not subsequently be moved, save with the consent of the parties. Until the point where the arbitration commenced, the juridical seat could be established as required under the Act by looking at all the circumstances, but to allow it to be reviewed and changed after commencement would allow it to become peripatetic.

Citations:

Gazette 07-Dec-2000, Times 24-Nov-2000

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1996 67 68 69

Arbitration, International

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.80152

Andrews (Trading As BA Contractors) v Bradshaw and Another: CA 11 Oct 1999

Although an arbitrator had failed to hide his irritation and impatience with one side on a case referred to him, that was insufficient to justify taking the reference away. However an agreement reached with one side only as to his costs could suggest a need for impartiality. The arbitrator had expressed himself unwisely, but had conducted the arbitration itself fairly, and his appointment would not be set aside.

Citations:

Times 11-Oct-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.77794

Naviera Maritima Peruana SA v Compania Internacional de Seguros de Peru: CA 1988

Unless agreed otherwise, the law of the ‘seat’ of the arbitration will govern its conduct. The court overruled a first instance decision that an arbitration was to be conducted in Lima as the agreed forum (and therefore seat), but with English law as the lex fori. LJ Kerr referred to the complexities and inconveniences which such an arrangement would cause, including the impossibility or at best difficulty of the English Court exercising jurisdiction over an arbitration proceeding in Peru.

Judges:

Kerr LJ

Citations:

[1988] 1 Lloyds Rep 1116

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Halpern and Another v Halpern and others ComC 24-Mar-2006
The deceased parents, being orthodox Jews, had first made standard wills and then made provision accoding to Jewish law. A dispute after the second death was referred to a Beth Din arbitration. After an initial resolution, various distributions were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, International

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.239600

K/S A/S Bill Biakh v Hyundai Corporation: 1988

Citations:

[1988] 1 Lloyds Rep 187

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Lesotho Highlands Development Authority v Impregilo Spa and others HL 30-Jun-2005
The House had to consider whether the arbitrator had acted in excess of his powers under s38, saying the arbitrator had misconstrued the contract. The arbitrator had made his award in different currencies.
Held: The question remained whether . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.228174

Fletamentos Maritimos Sa v Effjohn Internation Bv (1): ComC 23 Jan 1996

ComC Arbitration – arbitration clause – further agreement subsequent to arbitration clause – incorporation of arbitration clause – separate agreement

Judges:

Langley J

Citations:

[1996] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 304

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Fletamentos Maritimos Sa v Effjohn Internation Bv (2) QBD 8-Oct-1996
A judge has the power to intervene in an arbitration even at interlocutory stage but should do so only rarely. . .
See Also – Fletamentos Maritimos SA v Effjohn International (No. 2) ComC 19-Dec-1997
Arbitration – Alleged misconduct by Umpire – discovery – refusal to adjourn. Principles applicable. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186001

Philip Alexander Securities and Futures Ltd v Bamberger and Others: CA 22 Jul 1996

Citations:

Times 22-Jul-1996, [1997] Eu LR 63, [1996] CLC 1757

Statutes:

Consumer Arbitration Agreements Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from (Affirmed) – Philip Alexander Securities and Futures Ltd v Bamberger and Others ComC 8-May-1996
ComC Consumer contracts – arbitration provision – Consumer Arbitration Agreements Act 1988 – exceptions – sections 2(b), 4 : European Union – Consumer contracts – arbitration provision – Consumer Arbitration . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Contract, Consumer

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186007

Philip Alexander Securities and Futures Ltd v Bamberger and Others: ComC 8 May 1996

ComC Consumer contracts – arbitration provision – Consumer Arbitration Agreements Act 1988 – exceptions – sections 2(b), 4 : European Union – Consumer contracts – arbitration provision – Consumer Arbitration Agreements Act 1988 – exceptions – section 2(a) – distinction between domestic and non-domestic consumers – discrimination – Article 6 EC – freedom to provide services – restriction – Article 59 EC – breach of European law – disapplication of section 2(a) : Consumer contracts – arbitration provision – ruling on application of arbitration provision by courts of Contracting State – Brussels Convention article 1(4) – exclusion of arbitration – meaning – Brussels Convention article 27(4), 28

Judges:

Waller J

Citations:

Independent 08-Jul-1996

Statutes:

Consumer Arbitration Agreements Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from (Affirmed) – Philip Alexander Securities and Futures Ltd v Bamberger and Others CA 22-Jul-1996
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, International, Consumer

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186006

Moscow City Council v Bankers Trust Company and Another: QBD 5 Jun 2003

Proceedings before an arbitrator were governed by rule 62.10, which provided its own entire code, and imposed a presumption in favour of privacy. The principles of Scott v Scott need not apply. Scott would now be decided under analogous reasonings under the Human Rights Act.

Judges:

Cooke J

Citations:

Times 01-Sep-2003

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 62.10, Arbitration Act 1996 68, European Convention on Human Rights A-6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Scott v Scott HL 5-May-1913
Presumption in Favour of Open Proceedings
There had been an unauthorised dissemination by the petitioner to third parties of the official shorthand writer’s notes of a nullity suit which had been heard in camera. An application was made for a committal for contempt.
Held: The House . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.185986

Hunter Kane Ltd v Watkins: 2003

Judges:

B Livesey QC

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 186 (Ch)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Emmott ComC 8-Jun-2011
The claimant challenged an arbitration award made concerning the agreement under which the defendant had been admitted to partnership. MWP contended that the Tribunal were guilty of a large number of serious irregularities in their conduct of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.573287

West of England Shipowners Mutual Insurance Association (Luxembourg) v Cristal Ltd: CA 1996

A contract had been set up to provide compensation for oil pollution losses. It was between oil companies who contributed to the fund and its administrators, Cristalwho was to ‘be the sole judge in accordance with these terms of the validity of any claim made hereunder’. The claimant association made a claim which Cristal rejected. It was accepted that the association was to be treated as a party to the contract. The main argument was as to ouster of jurisdiction.
Held: The Court rejected the argument. It was not argued that the fact of Crystal being the sole judge vitiated the agreement.
Neill LJ stated: ‘it does not seem to me that any question arises as to the ouster of the jurisdiction of the court. The court clearly has a role to play. The problem is to define the extent of that role.
I see the force of the submission that it is unusual for one party to a contract to be constituted the sole arbiter of the validity of any claim made against it. There is therefore attraction in the argument that the determination under cl.IX is merely . . a first stage determination . . I have come to the conclusion, however, that this argument must be rejected.’

Judges:

Neill LJ

Citations:

[1996] CLC 240

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – West of England Shipowners Mutual Insurance Association (Luxembourg) v Cristal Ltd ComC 25-Jan-1995
cw Contract – contractual rights – fulfilment of conditions – freedom to fulfil bargain – court action precluded – ouster clauses – arbitration – term – construction – one party sole arbitrator of construction – . .

Cited by:

Cited – Charles Stanley and Co Ltd v Adams QBD 19-Jul-2013
The claimant stock broking firm sought to recover its uninsured losses after having paid out for what was said to have been negligent advice by the respondent, a self-employed broker working for them.
Held: The power to recover such losses . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Arbitration

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.570106

K/S Norjarl A/S v Hyundai Heavy Industries Co Ltd: CA 1992

A third arbitrator appointed by the arbitrators already appointed, accepted office on the basis that the hearing would take place by a specified date and would last for a specified period. Three years later, the plaintiffs’ solicitors requested the arbitrators to fix a period for the hearing over twice as long and in two further years’ time. The third arbitrator replied that the tribunal might consider this but that the parties should consider the fees likely to be incurred and he set out a statement of the fees chargeable including a non-refundable commitment fee payable in advance of the hearing. The defendants’ arbitrator took no part in the ensuing discussion of fees. The parties did not accept the proposal but invited its withdrawal. The third arbitrator and the plaintiffs’ arbitrator offered their resignations. The plaintiffs’ solicitors made a proposal acceptable to the arbitrators but sought an assurance that the defendants’ solicitors had no objection to the plaintiffs making the payments proposed. The defendants’ solicitors maintained that the two arbitrators had no power to demand advance fees; the fees were excessive, and that it was inappropriate for one party to pay the fees demanded to the two arbitrators. They did not allege partiality. They later wrote that both arbitrators should continue on the terms as appointed but withdrawing the new fees demand. The plaintiffs sought declarations that the arbitrators were fit and proper persons to act and that their acceptance of the plaintiffs’ fee arrangements would not raise any imputations of bias. The defendants applied for an order that the two arbitrators be removed.
Held: For an arbitrator to insist upon a fee without the consent of all parties constitutes misconduct: ‘Any fee upon which (the arbitrators) wish to insist should be made known at the outset before acceptance of appointment.’
However, the express disavowal by the defendants of any imputation of actual bias and their request that the arbitrators continue to act, precluded the exercise by the court of its discretion to remove them but, that the conclusion of an agreement between the arbitrators and the plaintiffs on the basis of the plaintiffs’ revised proposal would be improper. The majority took the view that by reason of the change in circumstances the request for a commitment fee was justified, that a mere request by an arbitrator for a commitment fee did not amount to misconduct and that, in any event, even if the entry by the arbitrators into separate negotiations with the plaintiffs for their fees amounted to misconduct, the express disavowal of bias and request of the arbitrators to continue to act precluded their removal.

Judges:

Legatt LJ

Citations:

[1992] QB 863, [1991] 3 All ER 211, [1991] 3 WLR 1025

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Jivraj v Hashwani SC 27-Jul-2011
The parties had a joint venture agreement which provided that any dispute was to be referred to an arbitrator from the Ismaili community. The claimant said that this method of appointment became void as a discriminatory provision under the 2003 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Legal Professions

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.442595

ABB Hochspumurgstechnik v Clearway: ComC 15 Oct 1999

Construction Contract – Award Costs – Two open offers – second offer relating to separate issue but not offering costs of all issues to date because no cause of action accrued at time of first offer – leave to appeal refused.

Judges:

Longmore J

Citations:

Unreported, 15 October 1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.225428

Fletamentos Maritimos SA v Effjohn International (No. 2): ComC 19 Dec 1997

Arbitration – Alleged misconduct by Umpire – discovery – refusal to adjourn. Principles applicable.

Judges:

Thomas J

Citations:

Unreported, 19 December 1997

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Fletamentos Maritimos Sa v Effjohn Internation Bv (1) ComC 23-Jan-1996
ComC Arbitration – arbitration clause – further agreement subsequent to arbitration clause – incorporation of arbitration clause – separate agreement . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.220823

Transcatalana de Commercio SA v Incobrassa Industrial e Commercial Brazileira SA: 1995

Judges:

Mance J

Citations:

[1995] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 215

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Agrimex Ltd v Tradigrain Sa and others ComC 9-Jul-2003
Challenge was brought against the fees charged by the arbitrator, and in particular at the cost of the arbitrator bringing in a legally qualified draftsman.
Held: A draftsman’s task would not be himself to refine the arbitrator’s reasoning, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.185872

Kurkjian v Marketing Exchange No 2: 1986

If a tribunal employs a lay or legal draftsman, the tribunal has a duty to satisfy themselves that the fee he charges is fair and reasonable; the extent of the work required of the tribunal in examining the fees charged by the lawyer is proportionate to the fees.

Judges:

Staughton J

Citations:

[1986] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 618

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Agrimex Ltd v Tradigrain Sa and others ComC 9-Jul-2003
Challenge was brought against the fees charged by the arbitrator, and in particular at the cost of the arbitrator bringing in a legally qualified draftsman.
Held: A draftsman’s task would not be himself to refine the arbitrator’s reasoning, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.185871

Kye Gbangbola and Lisa Lewis v Smith Sherriff Limited: TCC 20 Mar 1998

‘A tribunal does not act fairly and impartially if it does not give a party an opportunity of dealing with arguments which have not been advanced by either party’.

Judges:

His Honour Judge Humphrey Lloyd Qc

Citations:

[1998] 3 All ER 730

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1996 68

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Carillion Construction Ltd v Devonport Royal Dockyard Ltd CA 16-Nov-2005
The parties had disputed payments for subcontracting work on a major project. The matter had been referred to arbitration, and the claimants now appealed refusal of leave to appeal the adjudicator’s award.
Held: The dispute was complex and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Costs

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.185895

West of England Shipowners Mutual Insurance Association (Luxembourg) v Cristal Ltd: ComC 25 Jan 1995

cw Contract – contractual rights – fulfilment of conditions – freedom to fulfil bargain – court action precluded – ouster clauses – arbitration – term – construction – one party sole arbitrator of construction – contrary to public policy – exceptions – international contract – public policy – application
The parties disputed a contract providing compensation for oil pollution losses. It was between oil companies who contributed to the fund and its administrators, Cristal. It provided that Cristal was to ‘be the sole judge in accordance with these terms of the validity of any claim made hereunder’. The claimant association made a claim which Cristal rejected. It was accepted that the association was to be treated as a party to the contract.

Judges:

Waller J

Citations:

[1995] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 560, Lloyd’s List March 15 1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Reversed on Appeal – West of England Ship Owners Mutual Insurance Association (Luxembourg) v Cristal Ltd (The Glacier Bay) CA 26-Oct-1995
An agreement giving to a ‘sole judge’ the power to make a final decision was effective, and there was no appeal from his decision. The defendant’s decision in his capacity as Convention administrator was as a final arbiter and was unreviewable.

Cited by:

Appeal from – West of England Ship Owners Mutual Insurance Association (Luxembourg) v Cristal Ltd (The Glacier Bay) CA 26-Oct-1995
An agreement giving to a ‘sole judge’ the power to make a final decision was effective, and there was no appeal from his decision. The defendant’s decision in his capacity as Convention administrator was as a final arbiter and was unreviewable.
Appeal from – West of England Shipowners Mutual Insurance Association (Luxembourg) v Cristal Ltd CA 1996
A contract had been set up to provide compensation for oil pollution losses. It was between oil companies who contributed to the fund and its administrators, Cristalwho was to ‘be the sole judge in accordance with these terms of the validity of any . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Arbitration

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.182568

Staveley Industries Plc (T/A Ei Whs) v Odebrecht Oil and Gas Services Ltd: TCC 8 Mar 2001

Contracts were entered into to design, engineer and supply equipment for installation on oil and gas rigs. The contractor sought to assert that these were contracts governed by the Act, and the provisions for dispute resolution applied. The court held that the act suggested that the construction was to take place on ‘the Land’ and that there was no intention to include offshore installations within the Act.

Citations:

Gazette 08-Mar-2001

Statutes:

Interpretation Act 1978, Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract, Construction, Arbitration

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.89517

Mayor and Corporation of Dudley v Dudley, Stourbridge, and District Electric Traction Co: HL 23 Jul 1907

A corporation agreed to purchase, and a company to sell, a light railway at a price to be fixed by an arbitrator. The agreement did not fix any basis for the valuation. Held, in the circumstances of the case, that the arbitrator’s duty was to ascertain the value of the railway as a structure in situ, and not its value to the company as an income-earning concern

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Robertson, Atkinson, and Collins

Citations:

[1907] UKHL 636

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration

Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.622310

Great Western Railway Co v Phillips and Co Ltd: HL 4 Feb 1908

A Railway Act, after providing that when merchandise is conveyed in trucks not belonging to the company the trader shall be entitled to recover from the company a reasonable sum by way of demurrage for any detention of his trucks beyond a reasonable time, enacted that ‘any difference arising under this section shall be determined by an arbitrator to be appointed by the Board of Trade at the instance of either party.’
A claim by a trader for damages sustained by him in hiring a truck in the place of one delayed by the railway company held to be in respect of a ‘difference arising under this section,’ and to be accordingly a question for an arbitrator and not for a court of law.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Macnaghten, Robertson, Atkinson, and Collins

Citations:

[1908] UKHL 974, 45 SLR 974

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport, Arbitration

Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621493

Stati and Others v The Republic of Kazakhstan: CA 10 Aug 2018

Appeal from an order setting aside a notice of discontinuance filed by the Appellants as claimants in proceedings under section 101 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to enforce a New York Convention award. He directed that the allegations made by the Respondent of fraud by the Appellants in respect of the award should proceed to trial.

Judges:

Patten, David Ricjards, Leggatt LJJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 1896

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Approved – Singh v The Charity Commission and Others ChD 22-Dec-2016
The court considered the circumstances under which a withdrawal of a case might be challenged: ‘(1) the rules do not prescribe any particular test for permitting discontinuance or, for that matter, for setting aside a notice of discontinuance; (2) a . .

Cited by:

Cited – Arcadia Group Ltd and Others v Telegraph Media Group Ltd QBD 8-Feb-2019
Claimant’s application for leave to withdraw request for injunction to prevent publication of stories regarding matters subject to non-disclosure agreements.
Held: Granted. An junction had been granted, but Lord Hain had disclosed protected . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621106

Mercato Sports (UK) Ltd and Another v The Everton Football Club Company Ltd: ChD 12 Jul 2018

Claim by football agent for commission under implied contract on facilitating the signing of a player by the club.

Judges:

Eyre QC HHJ

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1567 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration, Contract

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619896

Sabbagh v Khoury and Others: ComC 31 May 2018

Application for an interim injunction from this court to require the Arbitration Claimants not to prosecute the Lebanese Arbitration, to take steps to stay it, and not to seek recognition or enforcement of any award made in that arbitration.

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1330 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619814

Mobile Telecommunications Company Ltd v HRH Al Saud (T/A Saudi Plastic Factory): ComC 18 May 2018

Application for final judgment by way of summary judgment under CPR Part 24 in a claim for relief by way of antisuit injunction to enforce and give effect to an arbitration agreement by the parties and its consequences.

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1469 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619811

Stewart v Williamson: HL 29 Apr 1910

A lease of a sheep farm for five years expiring at Whitsunday 1909. provided that at the expiry of the lease ‘the tenant shall leave the sheep stock on the farm to the proprietors or incoming tenant according to the valuation of men mutually chosen, with power to name an oversman.’ The Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 1908, section 11 (1), enacts-‘All questions which under this Act or under the lease are referred to arbitration shall . . be determined, notwithstanding any agreement under the lease or otherwise providing for a different method of arbitration, by a single arbiter in accordance with the provisions set out in the second schedule to this Act.’ Held that the Act applied, and that a single arbiter fell to be appointed.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), the Earl of Halsbury, Lord Atkinson, and Lord Mersey

Citations:

47 SLR 536, [1910] UKHL 2, 1910 1 SLT 326, 1910 SC (HL) 47, [1910] AC 455, [1910] UKHL 536

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

At SCS – Stewart v Williamson SCS 13-Jul-1909
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Agriculture

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619791

Agile Holdings Corporation v Essar Shipping Ltd: ComC 11 May 2018

Whether jurisdiction to hear appeal from arbitration award where argued that did not refer to a question of law capable of determination.

Judges:

Judge Waksman QC sitting as a High Court judge

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1055 (Comm), [2018] WLR(D) 294

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration, Transport

Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.617005

Goodwood Investments Holdings Inc v Thyssenkrupp Industrial Solutions Ag (M/Y Palladium): ComC 9 May 2018

Application under section 45 of the Arbitration Act 1996 for determination by the court of a question of law arising in the course of an arbitration, namely whether an arbitration claim under a shipbuilding contract has been settled in without prejudice correspondence between the parties’ solicitors.

Judges:

Males J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1056 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration

Updated: 20 April 2022; Ref: scu.614940

Sigma Orionis v REA T-47/16: ECFI 3 May 2018

Judgment – Arbitration clause – Horizon 2020 Framework Program for Research and Innovation’ – Suspension of payments from a grant agreement following a financial audit – Request to obtain payment of amounts due from the REA in the framework for the execution of a grant agreement

Citations:

ECLI: EU: T: 2018: 247, [2018] EUECJ T-47/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Arbitration

Updated: 14 April 2022; Ref: scu.609524

Sigma Orionis v Commission T-48/16: ECFI 3 May 2018

(Judgment) Arbitration clause – Seventh Framework Program for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities (2007-2013) and Horizon 2020 Framework Program for Research and Innovation – Suspension of payments and termination of grant contracts following a financial audit – Request for payment of the sums due by the Commission in connection with the performance of the grant contracts – Non-contractual liability

Citations:

ECLI: EU: T: 2018: 245, [2018] EUECJ T-48/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Arbitration

Updated: 14 April 2022; Ref: scu.609523

Reliance Industries Ltd and Another v The Union of India: ComC 16 Apr 2018

T The Claimants made nine challenges to parts of an arbitration award made variously under the provisions of sections 67, 68 and 69 of the 1996 Act.

Judges:

Popplewell J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 822 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1996 67 68 69

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration

Updated: 13 April 2022; Ref: scu.609096

Halliburton Company v Chubb Bermuda Insurance Ltd and Others: CA 19 Apr 2018

‘This appeal raises issues of importance in relation to commercial arbitration law and practice. The specific issues upon which the judge gave permission to appeal may be summarised as follows:
(1) Whether and to what extent an arbitrator may accept appointments in multiple references concerning the same or overlapping subject matter with only one common party without thereby giving rise to an appearance of bias.
(2) Whether and to what extent he may do so without disclosure.
The second of those issues gives rise to the consideration of two further general issues, namely:
(1) When should an arbitrator make disclosure of circumstances which may give rise to justifiable doubts as to his impartiality?
(2) What are the consequences of failing to make disclosure of circumstances which should have been disclosed?’

Judges:

Sir Geoffrey Vos Ch, Simon, Hamblen LJJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 817

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration

Updated: 13 April 2022; Ref: scu.608739

Shell UK Ltd et al v Enterprise Oil plc: ChD 17 Jun 1999

Where the parties had agreed that their rights under a contract were to be determined by an expert acting under agreed procedures, but the expert departed from those procedures, the test was to look at whether the departure from the instructions was material. The use of almost equivalent software was such.

Citations:

Times 17-Jun-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Arbitration

Updated: 13 April 2022; Ref: scu.89216

Secretary of State for the Environment v Euston Centre Investments Ltd: ChD 5 Jan 1994

Appeals from arbitrators must be prosecuted speedily or will risk being struck out. The tests will be applied stringently.

Citations:

Gazette 08-Jun-1994, Gazette 20-Apr-1994, Times 05-Jan-1994

Statutes:

Arbitration Act 1979 1(3)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Secretary of State for the Environment v Euston Centre Investments Ltd CA 6-Jul-1994
Arbitration appeal may be struck out for delay without the need to show evidence of prejudice from that delay. Nevertheless relief against an order striking out an appeal should given where some substantial part of the fault for the delay was the . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Secretary of State for the Environment v Euston Centre Investments Ltd CA 6-Jul-1994
Arbitration appeal may be struck out for delay without the need to show evidence of prejudice from that delay. Nevertheless relief against an order striking out an appeal should given where some substantial part of the fault for the delay was the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration

Updated: 13 April 2022; Ref: scu.89104