Mc Carthy -v- Keane & Ors [2004] IESC 104 (16 December 2004)

Mc Carthy -v- Keane & Ors [2004] IESC 104 (16 December 2004)

The arbitrator acted within the scope of his authority and terms of reference, followed fair procedures, and made no rulings amounting to misconduct or procedural mishap. The applicant was not unfairly disadvantaged, and there is no basis to set aside or remit the award under the Arbitration Act 1954.

Citation
[2004] IESC 104
Parties
Plaintiff/applicant: John McCarthy; Defendant/respondent: Enda Keane; Defendant/respondent: Eireann International Finance Brokers Limited; Defendant/respondent: Warrantell Limited; Defendant/respondent: Des Peelo
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
16 December 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed.
Legal Topics
Arbitrator Misconduct, Share Valuation, Minority Shareholder Rights, Section 205 Companies Act 1963, Arbitration Act 1954, Procedural Fairness in Arbitration
Arbitration Company Law Arbitrator Misconduct Share Valuation Minority Shareholder Rights Section 205 Companies Act 1963 Arbitration Act 1954 Procedural Fairness in Arbitration

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John McCarthy

Plaintiff/applicant

Enda Keane

Defendant/respondent

Eireann International Finance Brokers Limited

Defendant/respondent

Warrantell Limited

Defendant/respondent

Des Peelo

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator misconducted himself or the proceedings under sections 37 and 38 of the Arbitration Act 1954
  2. 2 Whether the award should be set aside or remitted under section 36 of the Arbitration Act 1954
  3. 3 Whether procedural rulings or approach to valuation constituted misconduct

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitrator acted within the scope of his authority and terms of reference, followed fair procedures, and made no rulings amounting to misconduct or procedural mishap. The applicant was not unfairly disadvantaged, and there is no basis to set aside or remit the award under the Arbitration Act 1954.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed.

Orders

  • No basis to set aside or remit the arbitral award.
  • Arbitrator not removed; award stands.