K v S [2019] EWHC 2386 (Comm) (09 July 2019)

K v S [2019] EWHC 2386 (Comm) (09 July 2019)

The tribunal's exclusion of the expert report was a procedural/case management decision within its powers under section 34 of the Arbitration Act 1996, made with due process and after giving K a reasonable opportunity to be heard. There was no failure to comply with section 33, no serious irregularity, and the procedural order was not an 'award' capable of challenge under section 68. The application must fail.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2386 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: K; Defendant: S
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996 Challenge / Judgment on Application to Set Aside/remit Procedural Order of Arbitral Tribunal
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Section 68 Challenge, Serious Irregularity, Procedural Fairness, Admissibility of Evidence, Case Management Powers, Arbitral Awards
Arbitration Civil Procedure Section 68 Challenge Serious Irregularity Procedural Fairness Admissibility of Evidence Case Management Powers Arbitral Awards

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

K

Claimant

S

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Section 68 Arbitration Act 1996 Challenge / Judgment on Application to Set Aside/remit Procedural Order of Arbitral Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral tribunal's procedural order excluding an expert report constituted a serious irregularity under section 68(2)(a) of the Arbitration Act 1996 by failing to comply with its general duty under section 33.
  2. 2 Whether the court can interfere with the tribunal's procedural/case management decisions absent procedural unfairness.
  3. 3 Whether the procedural order was an 'award' capable of challenge under section 68.

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal's exclusion of the expert report was a procedural/case management decision within its powers under section 34 of the Arbitration Act 1996, made with due process and after giving K a reasonable opportunity to be heard. There was no failure to comply with section 33, no serious irregularity, and the procedural order was not an 'award' capable of challenge under section 68. The application must fail.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed