Czech Republic v Diag Human SE & Anor

Czech Republic v Diag Human SE & Anor

The proposed new ground of objection is barred by s.73(1) of the Arbitration Act 1996 because the Czech Republic and its legal team had sufficient material during the arbitration to investigate Mr Stava's nationality status with reasonable diligence. The application for permission to amend is refused, and no order for disclosure is appropriate. The extension of time application does not arise, but would have been granted if necessary.

Parties
Claimant: The Czech Republic; Defendant: Diag Human SE; Defendant: Josef Stava
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Challenge / Application for Permission to Amend Particulars of Claim
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Dual Nationality, Jurisdictional Objections, Amendment of Pleadings, Reasonable Diligence, Extension of Time
Arbitration International Investment Law Dual Nationality Jurisdictional Objections Amendment of Pleadings Reasonable Diligence Extension of Time

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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Czech Republic

Claimant

Diag Human SE

Defendant

Josef Stava

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Challenge / Application for Permission to Amend Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Czech Republic should be granted permission to amend its particulars of claim to add a new s.67 challenge based on Mr Stava's dominant and effective nationality
  2. 2 Whether the proposed challenge is barred by s.73(1) of the Arbitration Act 1996 due to lack of reasonable diligence
  3. 3 Whether an extension of time under s.80(5) of the Arbitration Act 1996 should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed new ground of objection is barred by s.73(1) of the Arbitration Act 1996 because the Czech Republic and its legal team had sufficient material during the arbitration to investigate Mr Stava's nationality status with reasonable diligence. The application for permission to amend is refused, and no order for disclosure is appropriate. The extension of time application does not arise, but would have been granted if necessary.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Permission to amend the particulars of claim is refused.
  • No order for disclosure is made in relation to the proposed challenge.