LMH v EGK (Re Arbitration Act 1996) [2023] EWHC 1832 (Comm) (19 July 2023)

LMH v EGK (Re Arbitration Act 1996) [2023] EWHC 1832 (Comm) (19 July 2023)

None of the five grounds advanced by LMH established a serious irregularity under s.68 of the Arbitration Act 1996. The tribunal addressed causation and loss, gave adequate reasons, did not adopt a measure of loss outside the issues, and its damages calculation did not breach procedural fairness. Any alleged computational error was either not established or should have been addressed under the ICC Rules correction procedure, barring a s.68 challenge.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1832 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: LMH; Defendant: EGK
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application Under S.68 Arbitration Act 1996 / Judgment on Application to Set Aside ICC Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Serious Irregularity Under S.68 Arbitration Act 1996, Good Faith Negotiation, Damages for Breach of Contract, Counterfactual Causation, Procedural Fairness in Arbitration, Computational Error in Arbitral Awards
Arbitration Commercial Law Serious Irregularity Under S.68 Arbitration Act 1996 Good Faith Negotiation Damages for Breach of Contract Counterfactual Causation Procedural Fairness in Arbitration Computational Error in Arbitral Awards

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 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LMH

Claimant

EGK

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application Under S.68 Arbitration Act 1996 / Judgment on Application to Set Aside ICC Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ICC arbitral award was affected by serious irregularity under s.68 Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the tribunal failed to deal with causation and loss
  3. 3 Whether the tribunal failed to give adequate reasons

Ratio Decidendi

None of the five grounds advanced by LMH established a serious irregularity under s.68 of the Arbitration Act 1996. The tribunal addressed causation and loss, gave adequate reasons, did not adopt a measure of loss outside the issues, and its damages calculation did not breach procedural fairness. Any alleged computational error was either not established or should have been addressed under the ICC Rules correction procedure, barring a s.68 challenge.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • All five grounds of challenge under s.68 Arbitration Act 1996 are dismissed.