Berkeley Burke Sipp Administration LLP v Wayne Charlton & Anor

Berkeley Burke Sipp Administration LLP v Wayne Charlton & Anor

The agreement between the parties to have the complaint reconsidered by the Financial Ombudsman did not constitute an arbitration agreement under section 6 of the Arbitration Act 1996 because the Ombudsman was not clothed with authority to make a binding determination unless accepted by the complainant, and the statutory scheme is not an arbitration agreement. Therefore, the Ombudsman's decision was not an arbitration award and is not susceptible to appeal under section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996.

Parties
Applicant: Berkeley Burke SIPP Administration LLP; Respondent: Wayne Charlton; Intervener: Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Application Under Arbitration Act 1996 S.69 / Determination of Preliminary Issue on Permission to Appeal From Arbitral Award
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Arbitration Agreement Definition, Jurisdiction of Financial Ombudsman, Judicial Review, Statutory Complaint Schemes
Arbitration Financial Services Arbitration Agreement Definition Jurisdiction of Financial Ombudsman Judicial Review Statutory Complaint Schemes

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Berkeley Burke SIPP Administration LLP

Applicant

Wayne Charlton

Respondent

Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Application Under Arbitration Act 1996 S.69 / Determination of Preliminary Issue on Permission to Appeal From Arbitral Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the decision of the Financial Ombudsman was made pursuant to an arbitration agreement under section 6 of the Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the Ombudsman's decision is an arbitration award susceptible to appeal under section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996

Ratio Decidendi

The agreement between the parties to have the complaint reconsidered by the Financial Ombudsman did not constitute an arbitration agreement under section 6 of the Arbitration Act 1996 because the Ombudsman was not clothed with authority to make a binding determination unless accepted by the complainant, and the statutory scheme is not an arbitration agreement. Therefore, the Ombudsman's decision was not an arbitration award and is not susceptible to appeal under section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for permission to appeal under section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 is dismissed.