header-logo header-logo

Arbitration & court intervention

03 March 2023 / Khawar Qureshi KC
Issue: 8015 / Categories: Features , Arbitration , ADR , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
Khawar Qureshi KC outlines key Arbitration Act 1996 cases in 2022
  • Last year saw a number of decisions illustrating the limited circumstances in which the English courts will intervene in Arbitration Act 1996 cases.

In November 2022, the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from the decision of Mr Justice Jacobs who had held that an arbitrator had wrongly decided that he had jurisdiction (DHL Project & Chartering Ltd v Gemini Ocean Shipping Co. Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1555, [2022] All ER (D) 77 (Nov)).

Charterers informed the owners of a vessel that it was not required, and a claim for approximately $US280,000 was brought by the owners alleging breach of a binding contract which contained a London arbitration clause. The charterparty contained a provision (known as a recap) which stated ‘subject/receivers approval’.

The Court of Appeal held that upon a proper construction, a binding contract would only come into existence where the ‘subjects’ (essentially conditions precedent) had been fulfilled, which had never happened. Accordingly, the separability principle (concerning

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll