header-logo header-logo

25 July 2014
Issue: 7616 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Arbitration—Appeal—Fresh evidence

Central Trading & Exports Ltd v Fioralba Shipping Company [2014] EWHC 2397 (Comm), [2014] All ER (D) 171 (Jul)

Queen’s Bench Division, Commercial Court, Males J, 16 Jul 2014

The court does not have an unfettered discretion to exclude relevant evidence on an application under s 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996), nor is the only ground upon which it may do so is that the admission of new evidence would cause prejudice to the other side.

Ben Olbourne (instructed by Grier Olubi Solicitors) for the claimant. Robert Bright QC and Charles Holroyd (instructed by Jackson Parton Solicitors) for the defendant.

The claimant had a claim for loss and damage to a cargo of bagged rice carried from Thailand to Nigeria pursuant to five bills of lading on board the defendant’s vessel. The bills were subject to English law, and each contained a London arbitration clause. The claimant claimed that it had become the holder of the bills, and that rights of suit were transferred to it

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

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

International arbitration team strengthened by double partner hire

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Firm celebrates trio holding senior regional law society and junior lawyers division roles

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Partner joins commercial and business litigation team in London

NEWS
The Legal Action Group (LAG)—the UK charity dedicated to advancing access to justice—has unveiled its calendar of training courses, seminars and conferences designed to support lawyers, advisers and other legal professionals in tackling key areas of public interest law
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll