Being seen to be done
Series: Estates Gazette ; (0015) 15 April 2000, 150-151(2)Publication details: 2000Subject(s): Summary: Considers the duty of disclosure for an arbitrator. The CA decision in "Lockerbail (UK) Ltd v Bayfield Properties Ltd" (2000) 1 AllER 65 established criteria to identify potential conflicts of interest. The recent High Court decision "Save & Prosper Pensions Ltd v Homebase Ltd" unreported March 2000 ordered the removal of a rent review arbitrator because his firm was acting for a company connected with one of the parties. The court clarified the circumstances in which such a conflict of interest could arise; confirming the scope of any necessary checks and the need for arbitrators to take steps to ensure full and appropriate disclosure. Reviews RICS guidance on the point.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS62187 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 105721-1001 |
Considers the duty of disclosure for an arbitrator. The CA decision in "Lockerbail (UK) Ltd v Bayfield Properties Ltd" (2000) 1 AllER 65 established criteria to identify potential conflicts of interest. The recent High Court decision "Save & Prosper Pensions Ltd v Homebase Ltd" unreported March 2000 ordered the removal of a rent review arbitrator because his firm was acting for a company connected with one of the parties. The court clarified the circumstances in which such a conflict of interest could arise; confirming the scope of any necessary checks and the need for arbitrators to take steps to ensure full and appropriate disclosure. Reviews RICS guidance on the point.