A & Ors v B & Anor [2011] EWHC 2345 (Comm) (15 September 2011)

A & Ors v B & Anor [2011] EWHC 2345 (Comm) (15 September 2011)

On the facts as known to the court, a fair-minded and informed observer would not conclude that there was a real possibility of apparent or unconscious bias arising from the arbitrator's simultaneous involvement as counsel for a firm of solicitors acting in the arbitration. The failure to disclose this involvement was inadvertent and did not amount to a serious irregularity under s68 of the Arbitration Act 1996. The IBA Guidelines did not require a different result.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 2345 (Comm)
Parties
Claimants: A and Others; First Defendant: B; Second Defendant: X
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application Under Arbitration Act 1996 / Judgment on Application to Remove Arbitrator and Challenge Partial Award
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Removal of Arbitrator, Apparent Bias, Impartiality, Disclosure Obligations, Serious Irregularity, Arbitration Act 1996 S24 and S68
Arbitration Commercial Law Removal of Arbitrator Apparent Bias Impartiality Disclosure Obligations Serious Irregularity Arbitration Act 1996 S24 and S68

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A and Others

Claimants

B

First Defendant

X

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application Under Arbitration Act 1996 / Judgment on Application to Remove Arbitrator and Challenge Partial Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether circumstances existed giving rise to justifiable doubts as to the arbitrator's impartiality under s24(1)(a) Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether failure to disclose involvement in unrelated litigation constituted serious irregularity under s68(1) Arbitration Act 1996

Ratio Decidendi

On the facts as known to the court, a fair-minded and informed observer would not conclude that there was a real possibility of apparent or unconscious bias arising from the arbitrator's simultaneous involvement as counsel for a firm of solicitors acting in the arbitration. The failure to disclose this involvement was inadvertent and did not amount to a serious irregularity under s68 of the Arbitration Act 1996. The IBA Guidelines did not require a different result.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application to remove arbitrator refused
  • Application to set aside partial award refused