Enter to open, tab to navigate, enter to select
Guidance on application to remit arbitration award back to tribunal for fuller reasons (High Court)
Practical Law UK Legal Update Case Report 6-518-0385 (Approx. 3 pages)
Guidance on application to remit arbitration award back to tribunal for fuller reasons (High Court)
by PLC Arbitration
| Published on 15 Feb 2012 • England, Wales |
In Navios International Inc v Sangamon Transportation Group [2012] EWHC 166 (Comm) (8 February 2012), the court considered an application under section 70(4) of the Arbitration Act 1996 for an order that the tribunal provide fuller reasons for its decision, to enable the court to deal properly with an appeal.
The Commercial Court has refused an application under section 70(4) of the Arbitration Act 1996 for three arbitral awards to be referred back to the relevant tribunals for fuller reasons, to enable the court to properly consider appeals under section 69.
The underlying disputes related to the interpretation of charterparty clauses. The defendant argued that the arbitrators' findings about the disputes' factual matrix were insufficient for the purposes of the appeals.
The court noted section 70(4) only applies if reasons are required "to enable the court properly to consider" the application or appeal. It is insufficient that the reasons would be helpful. The court's discretion under section 70(4) should be exercised very sparingly, given that applications for reasons are costly, cause delay and militate against finality.
In rejecting the application, the following factors influenced the court:
- The lateness of the defendant's application. Applications for further reasons should generally be issued before the application for permission to appeal the award and, on any view, before determination of the permission application.
- The order sought would require further evidence to be considered by the tribunals, not simply further reasons to be given.
- The amount in dispute was relatively small and the costs of remission would be disproportionate.
- There had already been significant delay, which would be exacerbated by remission.
- It would be a burden for the tribunals to give further reasons, given the elapse of time.
- The defendant was really seeking an opportunity to present further evidence and further findings from the tribunals, not considered during the arbitrations.
This was an inappropriate case for the exercise of the court's discretion under section 70(4) of the Arbitration Act 1996.