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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll