Strict rules of evidence as to documents and conduct of the arbitrator
Language: English Series: Arbitration and Dispute Resolution Law Journal ; June 1993, 90-99(10)Publication details: 1993Subject(s): Summary: In "Fairclough Building Ltd v Vale of Belvoir Superstore Ltd" (1990) F appealed against an arbitration award, maintaining the arbitrator had made errors in law concerning proof of documents. The arbitrator had failed to make clear that some documents needed to be proved and, if not proved, would not be considered. The matter of proof of evidence is considered here with the author also finding fault with F for not seeking removal of the arbitrator earlier but awaiting the outcome of the award first.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS48753 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 68419-1001 |
In "Fairclough Building Ltd v Vale of Belvoir Superstore Ltd" (1990) F appealed against an arbitration award, maintaining the arbitrator had made errors in law concerning proof of documents. The arbitrator had failed to make clear that some documents needed to be proved and, if not proved, would not be considered. The matter of proof of evidence is considered here with the author also finding fault with F for not seeking removal of the arbitrator earlier but awaiting the outcome of the award first.