Section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996

Primera Maritime (Hellas) Ltd and others v Jiangsu Eastern Heavy Industry Co Ltd and another [2013] EWHC 3066 (Comm), [2013] All ER (D) 172 (Oct);NLJ 25 October

In order to succeed under s68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, it was established that an applicant needed to show three things. First, a serious irregularity. Second, a serious irregularity which fell within the closed list of categories in s68(2) of the Act. Third, that one or more of the irregularities identified caused or would cause the party substantial injustice. The focus of the enquiry under s68 of the Act was due process, not the correctness of the tribunal’s decision. In cases under s68(2)(d) of the Act, there were four questions for the court: (i) whether the relevant point or argument was an “issue” within the meaning of the subsection; (ii) if so, whether the issue was “put” to the tribunal; (iii) if so, whether the tribunal failed to deal with it; and (iv) if so, whether that failure had caused substantial injustice.