New Age Alzarooni 2 Ltd & Anor v Range Energy Natural Resources Inc [2014] EWHC 4358 (Comm) (19 December 2014)

New Age Alzarooni 2 Ltd & Anor v Range Energy Natural Resources Inc [2014] EWHC 4358 (Comm) (19 December 2014)

The Section 68 application fails because the tribunal acted within its powers, applicants did not object during arbitration, and no serious irregularity or substantial injustice occurred. Section 73 bars the challenge. Orders made were within the scope of the arbitration agreement, terms of reference, and Jersey...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 4358 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: New Age Alzarooni 2 Limited; Claimant: Black Gold Kalakan Limited; Defendant: Range Energy Natural Resources Inc.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996 Challenge / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Serious Irregularity Under Arbitration Act 1996 S.68, Minority Shareholder Relief, Specific Performance, Unfair Prejudice, Jurisdiction and Powers of Arbitral Tribunal
Arbitration Company Law Serious Irregularity Under Arbitration Act 1996 S.68 Minority Shareholder Relief Specific Performance Unfair Prejudice Jurisdiction and Powers of Arbitral Tribunal

Source-derived case record

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

New Age Alzarooni 2 Limited

Claimant

Black Gold Kalakan Limited

Claimant

Range Energy Natural Resources Inc.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996 Challenge / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral tribunal exceeded its powers under s.68(2)(b) Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether there was serious irregularity causing substantial injustice under s.68
  3. 3 Whether orders made were ambiguous or uncertain under s.68(2)(f)

Ratio Decidendi

The Section 68 application fails because the tribunal acted within its powers, applicants did not object during arbitration, and no serious irregularity or substantial injustice occurred. Section 73 bars the challenge. Orders made were within the scope of the arbitration agreement, terms of reference, and Jersey law. No ambiguity, uncertainty, or failure to consider evidence was established.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Section 68 challenge dismissed
  • No orders to set aside or remit arbitration award