header-logo header-logo

05 March 2009
Issue: 7359 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Arbitration

F Ltd v M Ltd [2009] EWHC 275 (TCC), [2009] All ER (D) 260 (Feb)

The existence of a dissenting opinion on a point of law or fact, arising in connection with an issue that has been pleaded or dealt with by the parties in argument, will be irrelevant to any application under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996. The decision of the Arbitral Tribunal on such a point, albeit by a majority rather than unanimously, could not be challenged for serious irregularity in such circumstances.

However, a comment or observation in a dissenting opinion, to the effect that an important point has been decided by the majority without reference to the parties, will be a factor to which the court will attach weight in dealing with an application under s 68 (and may have considerable weight, although it is unlikely that it could, on its own, prove determinative).

Where an argument raised by the dissenting arbitrator has plainly been considered and rejected by the majority, even if it is an argument that the parties did not themselves raise, it may be difficult to say that there was a substantial injustice, since (regardless of how it arose) the argument will have been considered and rejected by the majority.

Issue: 7359 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

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