Arbitration Law Monthly

Leidos Inc v The Hellenic Republic [2019] EWHC 2738 (Comm) is a decision of Jacobs J on the costs of a successful application for an enforcement order under section 101 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and dismissal of a set aside application. The decision includes important analysis of the scope of section 103(2)(f) and the effect of proceedings in the curial court on an enforcement application.

Section 68(2)(g) of the Arbitration Act 1996 permits a court to overturn an award on the ground of serious irregularity if the award has been obtained by fraud. There are equivalent provisions in Singapore. In BVU v BVX [2019] SGHC 69 the Singapore High Court discussed the important question of whether a party to an arbitration who chooses not to submit evidence of its internal documents and employees on a particular matter can be guilty of fraud.

The decision of Teare J in Cockett Marine Oil DMCC v ING Bank NV [2019] EWHC 1533 (Comm) discusses a series of jurisdictional questions. The most important was if the question of whether there had been a valid assignment of the claimant’s rights went to jurisdiction, and so could be challenged under section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996.

In Rakna Arakshaka Lanka Ltd v Avant Garde Maritime Services (Pte) Ltd [2019] SGCA 33 the Singapore Court of Appeal has upheld a challenge to an award, in circumstances where the tribunal asserted a jurisdiction that they did not have. The decision to a large extent turns upon the provisions of Singaporean arbitration legislation, but there are some interesting points on the effect of a settlement agreement on jurisdiction and also on the role of fraud and public policy in the validity of an award.

In K v S [2019] EWHC 2386 (Comm) Sir Jeremy Cooke, sitting as a High Court Judge, rejected an application under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to set aside a ruling by the tribunal excluding evidence on a matter raised at a late stage by the appellant. The court found that there was no power to intervene in the making of a procedural order, and that the matter was one for the tribunal alone.

In Cavity Insulation Guarantee Agency Ltd v Thermabead Ltd, 2019, unreported, Roger ter Haar QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, was faced with an arbitration clause contained in the rules of an association and designed to deal with disputes between members of the association and their customers. The question for the court was whether the clause applied also to disputes between the association and its members.