Bridgehouse (Bradford No. 2) Ltd v BAE Systems Plc

Bridgehouse (Bradford No. 2) Ltd v BAE Systems Plc

The arbitration clause in the contract applies to BB2’s claim for relief under section 1028(3) of the Companies Act 2006 because the dispute arises out of the contract’s provisions. Applications for relief under section 1028(3) are arbitrable as there is no statutory or public policy prohibition, and the relief sought affects only the parties to the arbitration agreement. The possibility of third-party impact does not render the subject matter non-arbitrable; it may only limit the scope of relief an arbitrator can grant.

Parties
Appellant: Bridgehouse (Bradford No. 2) Limited; Respondent: BAE Systems PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Stay of Proceedings Under Arbitration Act 1996
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Arbitrability of Statutory Relief, Scope of Arbitration Clauses, Restoration of Companies, Public Policy and Arbitration
Arbitration Company Law Contract Law Arbitrability of Statutory Relief Scope of Arbitration Clauses Restoration of Companies Public Policy and Arbitration

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bridgehouse (Bradford No. 2) Limited

Appellant

BAE Systems PLC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Stay of Proceedings Under Arbitration Act 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the arbitration clause in the contract cover BB2’s claim for relief under section 1028(3) of the Companies Act 2006?
  2. 2 Is an application for relief under section 1028(3) of the Companies Act 2006 arbitrable or is it reserved to the courts by statute or public policy?

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitration clause in the contract applies to BB2’s claim for relief under section 1028(3) of the Companies Act 2006 because the dispute arises out of the contract’s provisions. Applications for relief under section 1028(3) are arbitrable as there is no statutory or public policy prohibition, and the relief sought affects only the parties to the arbitration agreement. The possibility of third-party impact does not render the subject matter non-arbitrable; it may only limit the scope of relief an arbitrator can grant.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed; the stay of proceedings under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 is upheld.