Flight Training International v International Fire Training Equipment Ltd

Flight Training International v International Fire Training Equipment Ltd

Clause XI does not constitute an agreement to arbitrate under the Arbitration Act 1996. It refers disputes to ACAS for mediation, not arbitration, and ACAS does not provide commercial arbitration services. The clause is not sufficiently certain or indicative of an intention to arbitrate. The defendant's application to strike out the claim succeeds.

Parties
Claimant: Flight Training International; Defendant: International Fire Training Equipment Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Commercial Arbitration Related Application / Ruling on Application for Directions Under Section 18 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and Cross Application to Strike Out Claim
Outcome
Defendant's application to strike out the claim is granted; claimant's application for directions is dismissed.
Legal Topics
Arbitration Agreement Validity, Interpretation of Dispute Resolution Clauses, Enforceability of Mediation Clauses
Arbitration Commercial Law Contract Law Arbitration Agreement Validity Interpretation of Dispute Resolution Clauses Enforceability of Mediation Clauses

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Flight Training International

Claimant

International Fire Training Equipment Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Arbitration Related Application / Ruling on Application for Directions Under Section 18 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and Cross Application to Strike Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Article XI of the Agreement constitutes an enforceable arbitration agreement under the Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the dispute resolution clause is enforceable as a mediation clause or otherwise

Ratio Decidendi

Clause XI does not constitute an agreement to arbitrate under the Arbitration Act 1996. It refers disputes to ACAS for mediation, not arbitration, and ACAS does not provide commercial arbitration services. The clause is not sufficiently certain or indicative of an intention to arbitrate. The defendant's application to strike out the claim succeeds.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application to strike out the claim is granted; claimant's application for directions is dismissed.

Orders

  • Claim struck out for lack of valid arbitration agreement under the Arbitration Act 1996.