Sumner & Anor v Costa Ltd & Anor

Sumner & Anor v Costa Ltd & Anor

The court has jurisdiction to order cross-examination of an arbitrator but should exercise it only in rare and exceptional cases. In this case, cross-examination is unnecessary and inappropriate. The arbitration was conducted on paper by expert surveyors, and the arbitrator's written reasons, though not flawless, are sufficient for the court to determine the substantive applications. Further oral evidence would undermine the principles of arbitration and the process chosen by the parties.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: Brenda Sumner; Claimant/applicant: Nick Makin; Defendant/respondent: Costa Limited; Defendant/respondent: P A Dickins
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Challenge (rent Review) / Application for Order to Cross Examine Arbitrator
Outcome
Application for order to cross-examine arbitrator dismissed
Legal Topics
Arbitrator's Duty to Give Reasons, Cross Examination of Arbitrator, Rent Review Arbitration, Serious Irregularity Under Arbitration Act 1996 S.68, Appeal on Point of Law Under Arbitration Act 1996 S.69, Removal of Arbitrator Under Arbitration Act 1996 S.24
Arbitration Landlord and Tenant Commercial Law Arbitrator's Duty to Give Reasons Cross Examination of Arbitrator Rent Review Arbitration Serious Irregularity Under Arbitration Act 1996 S.68 Appeal on Point of Law Under Arbitration Act 1996 S.69 +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brenda Sumner

Claimant/applicant

Nick Makin

Claimant/applicant

Costa Limited

Defendant/respondent

P A Dickins

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Challenge (rent Review) / Application for Order to Cross Examine Arbitrator

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to order cross-examination of an arbitrator regarding his reasons for an award
  2. 2 Whether cross-examination of the arbitrator is appropriate or necessary in the circumstances
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator's reasons were adequate under the Arbitration Act 1996

Ratio Decidendi

The court has jurisdiction to order cross-examination of an arbitrator but should exercise it only in rare and exceptional cases. In this case, cross-examination is unnecessary and inappropriate. The arbitration was conducted on paper by expert surveyors, and the arbitrator's written reasons, though not flawless, are sufficient for the court to determine the substantive applications. Further oral evidence would undermine the principles of arbitration and the process chosen by the parties.

Court Disposition

Application for order to cross-examine arbitrator dismissed

Orders

  • No order for cross-examination of the arbitrator
  • Substantive applications to proceed on the written material