A v B

A v B

The application for security under section 70(7) is dismissed because B failed to demonstrate that A's challenge to jurisdiction was flimsy or lacking in substance, and there was no evidence that the challenge would prejudice B's ability to enforce the award, particularly as enforcement proceedings were ongoing and effective in Kazakhstan.

Parties
Claimant (respondent in the Arbitrations): A; Defendant (claimant in the Arbitrations): B
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Related Application (commercial Court) / Ruling on Application for Security Under Section 70(7) Arbitration Act 1996
Outcome
Application for security under section 70(7) of the Arbitration Act 1996 dismissed.
Legal Topics
Security for Award, Jurisdictional Challenge, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Threshold for Security Orders
Arbitration Commercial Law Security for Award Jurisdictional Challenge Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Threshold for Security Orders

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A

Claimant (respondent in the Arbitrations)

B

Defendant (claimant in the Arbitrations)

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Related Application (commercial Court) / Ruling on Application for Security Under Section 70(7) Arbitration Act 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should order security for sums awarded in arbitration pending a section 67 challenge to jurisdiction and/or section 69 appeal on a question of law under the Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether there is a threshold requirement that the challenge to jurisdiction be 'flimsy' or lacking in substance before security can be ordered under section 70(7)
  3. 3 Whether the applicant must show risk of prejudice to enforcement to justify security

Ratio Decidendi

The application for security under section 70(7) is dismissed because B failed to demonstrate that A's challenge to jurisdiction was flimsy or lacking in substance, and there was no evidence that the challenge would prejudice B's ability to enforce the award, particularly as enforcement proceedings were ongoing and effective in Kazakhstan.

Court Disposition

Application for security under section 70(7) of the Arbitration Act 1996 dismissed.

Orders

  • Application for security for sums awarded in arbitration pending section 67 and 69 applications is dismissed.