header-logo header-logo

20 June 2013
Issue: 7565 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Arbitration

Philip Hanby Ltd v Clarke [2013] EWCA Civ 647, [2013] All ER (D) 107 (Jun)

It was settled law that: (i) the court referred to in s 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 was the High Court; (ii) accordingly, only the High Court could give or refuse permission to appeal an arbitrary award pursuant to s 69(2)(b) of the Act; (iii) similarly only a High Court judge could grant permission to appeal under s 69(6) of the Act the High Court judge’s decision under s 69(2)(b) of the Act; (iv) notwithstanding the apparent finality of the High Court’s refusal of permission to appeal from the arbitrary award under s 69(2)(b) of the Act, where the High Court had refused permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal, pursuant to s 69(6), the Court of Appeal retained a residual jurisdiction to set aside the refusal of permission under s 69(2)(b) in certain situations of unfair or improper process; (v) those situations were: (a) where the High Court judge had never reached something that could properly be called a decision at all; and (b) where the decision was reached through

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