ARTICLE
16 October 2017

Arbitration - Squibb Group v Pole 2 Pole

CC
Clyde & Co

Contributor

Clyde & Co  logo
Clyde & Co is a leading, sector-focused global law firm with 415 partners, 2200 legal professionals and 3800 staff in over 50 offices and associated offices on six continents. The firm specialises in the sectors that move, build and power our connected world and the insurance that underpins it, namely: transport, infrastructure, energy, trade & commodities and insurance. With a strong focus on developed and emerging markets, the firm is one of the fastest growing law firms in the world with ambitious plans for further growth.
Claimant refused extension of time to appeal an arbitral award where payment of arbitrator's fees was delayed
United Kingdom Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Case Alert - [2017] EWHC 2394 (TCC)

Claimant refused extension of time to appeal an arbitral award where payment of arbitrator's fees was delayed

The claimant applied for an extension of time to appeal against an arbitration award under section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996. The claimant had failed to apply for permission to appeal the award within the 28 day time limit provided for by section 70(3) of the Act. The award was only released to the parties after the 28 day time limit had expired, because the claimant had failed to pay the arbitrator's fees before then. This case is therefore similar to that of Rollitt v Ballard, although there it was the side which was not challenging the award which had refused to pay the arbitrator's fees. In that case the judge had found that there was no reasonable explanation for the delay and so the application to extend time was refused.

The same conclusion was reached in this case. The judge further found that "a very significant factor" in this case was the irremediable prejudice which the defendant would have suffered if the extension of time would have been granted. The defendant was a modest company with a turnover of £400,000, whereas the claimant's turnover was approximately £40 million. The award was for the "modest sum" of just under £100,000. As a result, it was held that any delay in enforcement of the award "would place considerable financial strain" on the defendant.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More