header-logo header-logo

03 August 2012
Issue: 7525 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Arbitration

Johann MK Blumenthal GMBH & Co KG and another v Itochu Corp [2012] EWCA Civ 996, [2012] All ER (D) 240 (Jul)

Where s 18(5) of the Arbitration Act 1996 applied, the reference to “the court” meant the court at first instance, so that if permission to appeal was refused by the judge at first instance, the Court of Appeal could not itself grant permission to appeal. The policy of restricting appeals, found in s 18 of the Act, was deliberate. It reflected the underlying general principles, as to party autonomy and protection of the parties from unnecessary delay and expense, enshrined in ss 1(a) and 1(b) of the Act.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll