Norwich Union v Whealing Horton & Toms Ltd

Norwich Union v Whealing Horton & Toms Ltd

The court found that the arbitrators had substantive jurisdiction, the awards for costs are enforceable under Section 66, and there is no arguable defence to enforcement. Post-award costs not covered by an award are only recoverable if incidental to enforcement. Interest is awarded at 6%.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Norwich Union Insurance Ltd.; Defendant: Whealing Horton & Toms Ltd.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Enforcement / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for claimant
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Arbitration Awards, Professional Indemnity Insurance, Costs Orders, Arbitration Jurisdiction
Insurance Law Arbitration Law Enforcement of Arbitration Awards Professional Indemnity Insurance Costs Orders Arbitration Jurisdiction

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Norwich Union Insurance Ltd.

Claimant

Whealing Horton & Toms Ltd.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Enforcement / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether arbitration awards for costs are enforceable under Section 66 of the Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the insurers acted in breach of contract or bad faith in settling the Riverside claim
  3. 3 Whether post-award costs not covered by arbitrator's award are recoverable

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrators had substantive jurisdiction, the awards for costs are enforceable under Section 66, and there is no arguable defence to enforcement. Post-award costs not covered by an award are only recoverable if incidental to enforcement. Interest is awarded at 6%.

Court Disposition

judgment for claimant

Orders

  • Enforcement of Mr. Hayes' awards for fees (£17,323.18 and £9,112.13) and costs (£43,539.08) against WHT.
  • Enforcement of judge-arbitrator's award for costs (£75,000) against WHT.