‘Serious Irregularity', Inappropriate Behaviour And Confidentiality

The losing Respondent in an ICC Arbitration with the seat in London challenged the Award on the grounds of 'serious irregularity' and argued that as one of the arbitrators had acted inappropriately, it should be set aside and not remitted back to the arbitrators. Lastly, the judge in Symbion Power LLC v Venco Imtiaz Construction Co [2017] EWHC 348 (TCC) considered whether the report of the challenge in court should be anonymised.

Serious Irregularity

The Respondent's application was based on section 68(2)(d) of the Arbitration Act 1996, which defines serious irregularity as a 'failure by the Tribunal to deal with all of the 'issues' that were put to it' if the court considers that it 'has caused or will cause substantial injustice'. In its judgment, the court revisited the decision in Secretary of the State for the Home Department v Raytheon Systems Ltd [2014] EWHC 4375 (TCC) which drew a distinction between 'issues' and arguments, points, lines of reasoning or