Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 07 JUNE 2016

Sino Channel v Dana Shipping: Whether Arbitration Notice Had Been Validly Served

The defendant appointed an arbitrator and emailed a notice of the arbitration to an individual (Mr Cai), who was not an employee of the other party to the purported arbitration (the claimant in this action).

United KingdomLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2016/1118.html

The defendant appointed an arbitrator and emailed a notice of the arbitration to an individual (Mr Cai), who was not an employee of the other party to the purported arbitration (the claimant in this action). However, Mr Cai had been handling the contract in question (and was the main contract point for the claimant) and there was a close relationship between his company and the claimant. After an award was handed down in favour of the defendant, the claimant applied to court pursuant to section 72 of the Arbitration Act 1996 for a declaration that the tribunal had not been properly constituted. Eder J held as follows:

(1) An application under section 72 does not have to be brought before an award is made. As confirmed by Walker J in London Steam Ship Owners v Kingdom of Spain (see Weekly Update 34/13), there is no need to confine section 72 in this way, because a party who does not participate in the arbitral

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from