Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Sinclair & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 3 (13 January 2017)

Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Sinclair & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 3 (13 January 2017)

It is not a fixed rule that a prior arbitration award cannot found an abuse of process argument in subsequent litigation. In rare and special circumstances, where relitigation would be manifestly unfair or bring the administration of justice into disrepute, the court may strike out proceedings as an abuse of process even if the prior decision was an arbitration award and the parties are not identical. In this case, the combination of Mr Sinclair's involvement in the arbitration, the findings of the tribunal, and the intended effect of the award justified the strike out of MWP's claim as an abuse of process.

Citation
[2017] EWCA Civ 3
Parties
Appellant: Michael Wilson & Partners Limited; 1st Respondent: Thomas Ian Sinclair; 2nd Respondent: Sokol Holdings Incorporated; 3rd Respondent (as to Costs Only): John Forster Emmott
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Commercial Court (strike Out Application) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Collateral Attack, Arbitration Award, Res Judicata, Issue Estoppel
Civil Procedure Arbitration Commercial Law Abuse of Process Collateral Attack Arbitration Award Res Judicata Issue Estoppel

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Wilson & Partners Limited

Appellant

Thomas Ian Sinclair

1st Respondent

Sokol Holdings Incorporated

2nd Respondent

John Forster Emmott

3rd Respondent (as to Costs Only)

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Commercial Court (strike Out Application) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is an abuse of process to relitigate issues in court proceedings that have already been determined against the claimant in prior arbitration between different parties.
  2. 2 Whether a prior arbitration award can form the basis for striking out subsequent litigation as an abuse of process.
  3. 3 Admissibility and use of arbitration awards in subsequent court proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

It is not a fixed rule that a prior arbitration award cannot found an abuse of process argument in subsequent litigation. In rare and special circumstances, where relitigation would be manifestly unfair or bring the administration of justice into disrepute, the court may strike out proceedings as an abuse of process even if the prior decision was an arbitration award and the parties are not identical. In this case, the combination of Mr Sinclair's involvement in the arbitration, the findings of the tribunal, and the intended effect of the award justified the strike out of MWP's claim as an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • MWP's claim against the Sinclair defendants struck out as an abuse of process
  • No abatement of adverse costs order in favour of the Sinclair defendants