Allegations of bias

An arbitrator must act without bias, and the arbitrator’s conduct must not give rise to any suggestion of bias. However, any accusation of this type in an attempt to remove an arbitrator under s24 of the Arbitration Act 1996 has to be supported by the most cogent evidence. I n Goel v Amega Ltd [2010] EWHC 2454 (TCC) the accusation of bias came from parties who had conducted a protracted course of conduct to prevent the arbitration going ahead. Unsurprisingly, Coulson J rejected their application for the removal of the arbitrator.

Goel: the facts

The Goels entered into a contract with the defendant to construct a house for them in Surrey. The agreement contained an arbitration clause. The parties fell out, and the contract was terminated in January 2008. The defendant commenced judicial proceedings in July 2009, but these were stayed under s9 of the Arbitration Act 1996. Arbitration was then commenced, and proceeded, in the words of Coulson J, ‘at glacier-like speed’.