7 Mar 2025
Court held s21(3)(b) is not confined to procedural matters; the arbitrator's invocation of s21(3)(b) was not premature and was properly applied to available evidence and conflicting expert reports; no extraneous evidence was introduced and no breach of natural justice occurred; both appeals dismissed with costs.
29 Nov 2022
The court refused to set aside the Final Award and ordered recognition and enforcement: the arbitrator was validly appointed and constituted, the alleged conflict of interest had been previously litigated and is res judicata, the parties had been given opportunity to be heard and the arbitrator addressed the material issues so there was no breach of natural justice or excess of jurisdiction warranting setting aside, and the court will not re-examine or overturn the arbitrator's factual findings; accordingly OS 23 to set aside is dismissed and OS 18 to recognise and enforce the award is allowe…
29 Nov 2022
The Final Award is recognised and enforced because the respondent failed to prove any statutory ground to set aside or refuse recognition: the arbitrator was validly appointed, considered and analyzed the evidence and issues, there was no breach of natural justice or jurisdictional excess, and the alleged conflict of interest was previously litigated and estopped; accordingly minimal judicial interference requires upholding the award.
16 Nov 2022
The court dismissed the reference application under s 42 and the application to set aside the award under s 37, holding the repeal of s 42 did not revive a right to challenge awards made after repeal and that the arbitrator's procedures and reasons did not amount to breach of natural justice warranting setting aside; the award is recognized and enforced under s 38(1) including the arbitrator's decision on the two CIPAA-adjudicated amounts, with LH and LY ordered to pay specified sums and interest; the arbitral tribunal had power under s 44 to tax costs but having declined, the court taxed cos…
20 Jun 2022
The Court held that the Arbitration Act 2005 limits court intervention in arbitration-related matters to the specific remedies and procedures it provides; an originating summons premised on the general declaratory powers of the Specific Relief Act cannot be used to restrain the Defendant from applying to recognise a foreign arbitral award under s38 of the Arbitration Act; accordingly the Court has no jurisdiction to grant the reliefs sought and the Defendant's Order 28 Rule 3B(1) application was allowed.
30 May 2022
Court dismissed Ragawang's application to set aside the awards and allowed One Amerin's applications to recognize and enforce the awards because the arbitrator acted within the terms of the submission, any procedural or timing issues were either remedied by proper extension or were not material breaches of natural justice, practising solicitors may duly certify copies for enforcement, and enforcement applications were within the six-year limitation period; costs award under s44 is not a ground for setting aside under s37.
30 May 2022
The court dismissed Ragawang's applications to set aside the Final Award (Save as to Costs) and Addendum because the awards were within the parties' submission and PAM contract, the arbitrator validly extended the award delivery under PAMAR and delivered within the extended period, no proven actual or objectively perceived bias or denial of fair hearing occurred that was material to the outcome, certification of documents by a practising advocate and solicitor was proper and estoppel applied, and the costs award could not be set aside because taxation of arbitration costs is within the arbitr…
24 Sept 2020
High Court has jurisdiction under ss 43 and 73 Courts of Judicature Act 1964 read with Order 45 r11 ROC to grant an interim stay of proceedings against an application to register an arbitral award under s 38 Arbitration Act 2005; defendants demonstrated special circumstances, including risk that appeal would be nugatory and significant public interest due to large award, thereby justifying an interim stay pending disposal of the appeal.
28 Nov 2019
The Federal Court held that under section 38 Arbitration Act 2005 the material part of an arbitral award that may be entered and enforced as a judgment of the High Court is the dispositive portion (the operative orders); the entire award including reasons and findings need not and should not be registered for enforcement, and the enforcement court must not go behind the award except on the limited grounds in section 39.
14 Jan 2019
Section 39(1)(a)(vii) of the Arbitration Act 2005 permits refusal, adjournment or suspension of recognition or enforcement where the award has not yet become binding; section 39(2) grants the court discretion to adjourn and order security. On the facts the parties had consensually referred related issues concerning ownership and delivery of equipment to a 2nd arbitration and agreed terms linking that arbitration to the Award; those facts established that the Award was not yet binding within s39(1)(a)(vii). The High Court erred in refusing to exercise the discretion. The recognition/enforcemen…