Party A v Party B & Anor [2026] EWHC 327 (Comm) (30 January 2026)

Party A v Party B & Anor [2026] EWHC 327 (Comm) (30 January 2026)

The court has no jurisdiction to stay or enjoin arbitral proceedings under CPR 3.1(2)(g) or otherwise pending s.24 or s.68 applications, and even if such jurisdiction existed, there are no exceptional circumstances in this case to justify intervention; the December Orders are procedural, not awards, and the arbitrations may proceed.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 327 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Party "A"; First Defendant: Party "B"; Second Defendant: Party "C"
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 January 2026
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application (arbitration Related) / Application for Stay/injunction Pending S.24 and S.68 Arbitration Act Challenges
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Stay of Arbitration, Court Intervention in Arbitration, Removal of Arbitrator, Section 24 Arbitration Act 1996, Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996, Procedural Orders Vs Awards
Arbitration Commercial Law Stay of Arbitration Court Intervention in Arbitration Removal of Arbitrator Section 24 Arbitration Act 1996 Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996 Procedural Orders Vs Awards

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Party "A"

Claimant

Party "B"

First Defendant

Party "C"

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application (arbitration Related) / Application for Stay/injunction Pending S.24 and S.68 Arbitration Act Challenges

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the court have jurisdiction to stay or enjoin arbitral proceedings pending s.24 or s.68 Arbitration Act applications?
  2. 2 Are the December Orders procedural orders or interim awards?
  3. 3 Are there exceptional circumstances justifying court intervention in the arbitral process?

Ratio Decidendi

The court has no jurisdiction to stay or enjoin arbitral proceedings under CPR 3.1(2)(g) or otherwise pending s.24 or s.68 applications, and even if such jurisdiction existed, there are no exceptional circumstances in this case to justify intervention; the December Orders are procedural, not awards, and the arbitrations may proceed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • No stay or injunction granted; arbitrations may proceed