C v D [2016] EWHC 1893 (Comm) (29 July 2016)

C v D [2016] EWHC 1893 (Comm) (29 July 2016)

The tribunal did not commit any serious irregularity, acted within its jurisdiction, and adopted a fair and appropriate procedure. The demands under the Adjustments Guarantee were valid as D honestly held the required opinion, and the Deferred Payments Guarantee claim was within the tribunal's jurisdiction as accepted by C2 in its Response.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 1893 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: C1; Claimant: C2; Claimant: C3; Defendant: D
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Challenge to Arbitral Award / Judgment on Applications Under Arbitration Act 1996 Sections 33, 67, and 68
Outcome
Applications under Arbitration Act 1996 dismissed
Legal Topics
First Demand Guarantees, Arbitral Jurisdiction, Serious Irregularity, Good Faith in Demands, Procedural Fairness
Arbitration Commercial Law First Demand Guarantees Arbitral Jurisdiction Serious Irregularity Good Faith in Demands Procedural Fairness

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

Parties

C1

Claimant

C2

Claimant

C3

Claimant

D

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Challenge to Arbitral Award / Judgment on Applications Under Arbitration Act 1996 Sections 33, 67, and 68

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral tribunal committed a serious irregularity under s.68 Arbitration Act 1996 in relation to the Adjustments Guarantee
  2. 2 Whether the tribunal had jurisdiction under s.67 Arbitration Act 1996 to make an award under the Deferred Payments Guarantee
  3. 3 Whether the tribunal failed to adopt a fair procedure under s.33 Arbitration Act 1996

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal did not commit any serious irregularity, acted within its jurisdiction, and adopted a fair and appropriate procedure. The demands under the Adjustments Guarantee were valid as D honestly held the required opinion, and the Deferred Payments Guarantee claim was within the tribunal's jurisdiction as accepted by C2 in its Response.

Court Disposition

Applications under Arbitration Act 1996 dismissed

Orders

  • Applications under sections 33, 67, and 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 are dismissed.