header-logo header-logo

16 October 2008
Issue: 7341 / Categories: Case law , Procedure & practice , Law digest , Arbitration
printer mail-detail

Arbitration

O’Donoghue v Enterprise Inns plc [2008] EWHC 2273 (Ch), [2008] All ER (D) 43 (Oct)

For an application under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to succeed, there must be a serious irregularity. The serious irregularity must fall within one of the classes set out in s 68(2).

Furthermore, it has to be such that it will cause (or has caused) substantial injustice to the applicant. Substantial injustice can only be demonstrated where what has happened simply cannot be defined as an acceptable consequence of the choice that the parties made to arbitrate.

An aggrieved party in an arbitration must raise any objections to the arbitration or the award forthwith; in this context “forthwith” means as soon as reasonably possible (and so involves raising an objection immediately following a procedural ruling).
 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

EIP—Stuart Malcolm

EIP—Stuart Malcolm

EIP strengthens Commercial practice with a new partner

Ellisons—Francesca Brown

Ellisons—Francesca Brown

Ellisons welcomes Francesca Brown to Family team

Shakespeare Martineau—Marie Bourke

Shakespeare Martineau—Marie Bourke

Shakespeare Martineau strengthens Sheffield regulatory practice with new hires

NEWS
A wide-ranging Civil Way column highlights developments from insolvency procedure to employment law, but one case stands out for its lessons on bankruptcy, family homes and digital communications
A sprawling Intellectual Property Office battle between House of Fraser and Frasers Property has delivered a masterclass in modern trade mark law
Courts in England and Wales and Singapore are increasingly confronting complex disputes over international child relocation as families become more globally mobile
The government’s long-awaited family law reform consultation could mark a turning point for domestic abuse victims navigating financial remedy proceedings, but significant challenges remain
A new commercial court pilot giving the public access to documents used in hearings, including expert reports, is raising difficult questions about transparency and privacy
back-to-top-scroll