Barclays v Jersey Stadium [2012] 1 JLR 119 (23 January 2012)

The court refused the application because it was not satisfied that the application might produce substantial savings in costs for the parties, as required by the statute.

Citation: [2012] 1 JLR 119
Parties: Applicant: Barclays; Respondent: Jersey Stadium
Jurisdiction: Jersey
Judgment Date: 23 January 2012
Procedural Posture: Arbitration / Application for Determination of Preliminary Point of Law
Outcome: application refused
Legal Topics: Preliminary Point of Law, Cost Savings, Arbitration (jersey) Law 1998

Arbitration Preliminary Point of Law Cost Savings Arbitration (jersey) Law 1998

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2

Parties

Barclays

Applicant

Jersey Stadium

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Arbitration / Application for Determination of Preliminary Point of Law

Legal Issues

1 Whether the application for determination of a preliminary point of law under Arbitration (Jersey) Law 1998, art. 22(1)(a) should be granted based on potential substantial savings in costs

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused the application because it was not satisfied that the application might produce substantial savings in costs for the parties, as required by the statute.

Court Disposition

application refused