Image from Google Jackets

Sumukan Ltd v Commonwealth Secretariat [electronic resource]

Language: English Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: Appeal by company (S) against a decision ([2007] EWHC 188 (Comm)) dismissing its challenge to an arbitration award because the arbitrators lacked substantive jurisdiction. A contract to create a prototype website between S?s predecessor in title and the respondent Commonwealth Secretariat contained a term providing for disputes to be referred to the Commonwealth Secretariat Arbitral Tribunal for settlement by arbitration in accordance with the tribunal's statute. A dispute arose as to whether title to the prototype website had passed to the secretariat or had remained in S's predecessor, and was referred to tribunal. An award in favour of the secretariat was made by a tribunal of three headed by the president (C) and S appealed. "Held": appeal allowed. As C had not been appointed in accordance with the agreed procedure his participation in the arbitration was unlawful and the award a nullity.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report Virtual Online ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 143347-2001

Appeal by company (S) against a decision ([2007] EWHC 188 (Comm)) dismissing its challenge to an arbitration award because the arbitrators lacked substantive jurisdiction. A contract to create a prototype website between S?s predecessor in title and the respondent Commonwealth Secretariat contained a term providing for disputes to be referred to the Commonwealth Secretariat Arbitral Tribunal for settlement by arbitration in accordance with the tribunal's statute. A dispute arose as to whether title to the prototype website had passed to the secretariat or had remained in S's predecessor, and was referred to tribunal. An award in favour of the secretariat was made by a tribunal of three headed by the president (C) and S appealed. "Held": appeal allowed. As C had not been appointed in accordance with the agreed procedure his participation in the arbitration was unlawful and the award a nullity.