header-logo header-logo

07 July 2011
Issue: 7473 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Arbitration

Sovarex SA v Romero Alvarez SA [2011] EWHC 1661 (Comm), [2011] All ER (D) 225 (Jun)

Case law drew a distinction between protesting that an arbitration tribunal had no jurisdiction, asserting that the issue should be decided by some other court or tribunal, and asking the tribunal to consider the issue of jurisdiction. In the latter case, the party was likely to be held to have invoked the jurisdiction of the tribunal. Moreover, the court had the power to direct that there be a determination of disputed issues of fact under s 66 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and there was no necessity for that to be done by way of action on the award.

In cases of complexity it would still be appropriate for the proceedings to continue as if it were an action, however, in relatively straightforward cases of fact such as were commonly determined on an application under s 67 of the Act. It was appropriate for the issues to be dealt with under s 66 and for appropriate directions to be given under CPR

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll