Mylcrist Builders Ltd v Buck

Mylcrist Builders Ltd v Buck

The arbitration clause was not binding on Mrs Buck as it was an unfair term under the 1999 Regulations, and the arbitrator was not properly appointed under the Arbitration Act 1996. Therefore, the arbitral tribunal lacked substantive jurisdiction and the award could not be enforced under s.66(3) of the 1996 Act.

Parties
Claimant: Mylcrist Builders Limited; Defendant: Mrs G Buck
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Application to Enforce Arbitration Award / Judgment on Enforcement Application
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Arbitration Awards, Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts, Appointment of Arbitrator, Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunal
Arbitration Consumer Protection Contract Law Enforcement of Arbitration Awards Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Appointment of Arbitrator Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunal

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

Parties

Mylcrist Builders Limited

Claimant

Mrs G Buck

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Enforce Arbitration Award / Judgment on Enforcement Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator was properly appointed under the Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration clause was an unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and thus unenforceable

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitration clause was not binding on Mrs Buck as it was an unfair term under the 1999 Regulations, and the arbitrator was not properly appointed under the Arbitration Act 1996. Therefore, the arbitral tribunal lacked substantive jurisdiction and the award could not be enforced under s.66(3) of the 1996 Act.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Claimant's application to enforce the arbitration award is dismissed
  • Written submissions invited as to any consequential matters