RJ & Anor v HB [2018] EWHC 2833 (Comm) (26 October 2018)

RJ & Anor v HB [2018] EWHC 2833 (Comm) (26 October 2018)

Award #3 and associated reasoning were affected by serious irregularity because the arbitrator granted relief not sought or argued by the parties without notice, depriving them of a fair opportunity to address it and causing substantial injustice. Setting aside, not remission, was appropriate due to the nature and extent of the irregularity. Removal of the arbitrator was not warranted as no serious case was made out and proper procedure was not followed.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 2833 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: RJ; Claimant: L Ltd; Defendant: HB
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Arbitration Challenge / Judgment on S.68 Arbitration Act 1996 Application
Outcome
Award #3 and affected reasoning set aside; arbitrator not removed; matter to be reconsidered by the same arbitrator.
Legal Topics
Serious Irregularity Under S.68 Arbitration Act 1996, Remission Vs Setting Aside Arbitral Award, Removal of Arbitrator, Declaratory Relief, Procedural Fairness in Arbitration
Arbitration Commercial Law Serious Irregularity Under S.68 Arbitration Act 1996 Remission Vs Setting Aside Arbitral Award Removal of Arbitrator Declaratory Relief Procedural Fairness in 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RJ

Claimant

L Ltd

Claimant

HB

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Arbitration Challenge / Judgment on S.68 Arbitration Act 1996 Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Award #3 is affected by serious irregularity under s.68 Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the irregularity caused substantial injustice
  3. 3 Whether affected parts of the award should be set aside or remitted

Ratio Decidendi

Award #3 and associated reasoning were affected by serious irregularity because the arbitrator granted relief not sought or argued by the parties without notice, depriving them of a fair opportunity to address it and causing substantial injustice. Setting aside, not remission, was appropriate due to the nature and extent of the irregularity. Removal of the arbitrator was not warranted as no serious case was made out and proper procedure was not followed.

Court Disposition

Award #3 and affected reasoning set aside; arbitrator not removed; matter to be reconsidered by the same arbitrator.

Orders

  • Award #3 and associated paragraphs of reasoning in the Final Award, Addendum 1, and Addendum 2 are set aside.
  • The arbitrator is to resume the arbitration and reconsider the proper relief to be granted, subject to further procedural directions.