header-logo header-logo

27 September 2013 / Dr Chris Pamplin
Issue: 7577 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession
printer mail-detail

Balance of power

istock_000027230619medium

Can the court override an expert determination decision, asks Chris Pamplin

There is a general presumption that, where parties have made an agreement for a particular form of dispute resolution, that agreement will be binding on both parties and they should be held to it (see Channel Tunnel Group Ltd v Balfour Beatty Construction Ltd [1993] AC 334, [1993] 1 All ER 664). In Barclays Bank v Nylon Capital [2011] EWCA Civ 826, [2011] All ER (D) 214 (Jul), the Court of Appeal considered how far this presumption should be applied to the jurisdiction of an expert appointed under an expert determination (ED) clause, and whether the agreement reached by the parties could overreach the powers of the court to determine the expert’s jurisdiction.

Venture capital

Barclays Bank v Nylon Capital revolved around what had to be paid to whom when Barclays pulled out of a joint venture with Nylon Capital. Barclays issued claims against Nylon seeking declarations by the court that they were not obliged to pay anything. Nylon applied

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll