Cakebread & Anor v Fitzwilliam

Cakebread & Anor v Fitzwilliam

The court held that the arbitrator's reasoning and findings on loss and damages were based on essential building blocks presented by the parties, and that the claimants had a fair opportunity to address all relevant issues. The reference to restitutionary damages was not an essential building block and did not constitute a serious irregularity. The high threshold for intervention under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 was not met.

Parties
Claimant: Stuart Alan Charles Cakebread; Claimant: Juliette Dora Levy; Defendant: Arthur Panayotis Fitzwilliam
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Challenge / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award Under Section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Serious Irregularity in Arbitration, Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996, Deceit, Measure of Damages in Tort, Restitutionary Damages, Compensatory Damages, Duty of Fairness in Arbitration
Arbitration Contract Law Tort Law Serious Irregularity in Arbitration Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996 Deceit Measure of Damages in Tort Restitutionary Damages +2 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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stuart Alan Charles Cakebread

Claimant

Juliette Dora Levy

Claimant

Arthur Panayotis Fitzwilliam

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Challenge / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award Under Section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral tribunal committed a serious irregularity under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 by deciding on issues not argued by the parties
  2. 2 Whether the claimants were denied a fair opportunity to address the tribunal on the measure of damages and restitutionary principles
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator's findings on loss and damages were based on essential building blocks presented by the parties

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the arbitrator's reasoning and findings on loss and damages were based on essential building blocks presented by the parties, and that the claimants had a fair opportunity to address all relevant issues. The reference to restitutionary damages was not an essential building block and did not constitute a serious irregularity. The high threshold for intervention under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 was not met.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • No basis for the court to intervene under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996
  • Claimants' application to set aside or remit the arbitral award is dismissed