Shuttari v Solicitors' Indemnity Fund

Shuttari v Solicitors' Indemnity Fund

The arbitrator acted fairly and impartially, giving both parties reasonable opportunity to present their cases. Refusal to adjourn for psychiatric evidence did not constitute serious irregularity or cause substantial injustice. The evidence provided did not stand a realistic chance of reversing the finding of...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Fawzia Amtul-Habib Shuttari; Defendant: Solicitors' Indemnity Fund Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 May 2004
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Challenge / Judgment on Application to Set Aside/remit Arbitral Award
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Serious Irregularity, Dishonesty, Indemnity, Mental Capacity, Procedural Fairness
Arbitration Professional Negligence Insurance Serious Irregularity Dishonesty Indemnity Mental Capacity Procedural Fairness

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fawzia Amtul-Habib Shuttari

Claimant

Solicitors' Indemnity Fund Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Challenge / Judgment on Application to Set Aside/remit Arbitral Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal to adjourn arbitration to allow medical evidence constituted serious irregularity under section 68 Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether arbitrator failed to act fairly and impartially under section 33 Arbitration Act 1996
  3. 3 Whether substantial injustice was caused by refusal to admit psychiatric evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitrator acted fairly and impartially, giving both parties reasonable opportunity to present their cases. Refusal to adjourn for psychiatric evidence did not constitute serious irregularity or cause substantial injustice. The evidence provided did not stand a realistic chance of reversing the finding of dishonesty. The challenge to the arbitral award fails.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • challenge to arbitral award under section 68 Arbitration Act 1996 dismissed
  • no remission or setting aside of award