Amego Litho Ltd v Scanway Ltd
Amego Litho Ltd v Scanway Ltd
- 1994
- Estates Gazette (1994) 02 EG 110-112(3) .
ChD 26 March 1993. Following a reference to determine a rent review the arbitrator made his award of £332,700pa based on a rental value in relation to the net internal area of £12.07. The tenant appealed under Arbitration Act 1979 s1 to set aside the award under Arbitration Act 1950 s23 on the grounds that the arbitrators conclusion was contradicted when stating that he relied on a comparable whose rental value was £10.40. He had also disregarded improvements on the grounds that this did not affect the rental value. Held that there was no error in law by the arbitrator within the principles of "Edwards v Bairstow" even if he was at error in handling the comparables however his award was set aside and he was dismissed on the grounds that he had misconducted the proceedings by rejecting evidence put forward by the tenant notwithstanding that the evidence could have been objected to by the landlord, and was not, as inadmissible evidence.
ARBITRATION ACT 1950 S23
ARBITRATION ACT 1979 S1
ARBITRATORS' AWARDS
COMPARABLES
EVIDENCE
INADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE
MISCONDUCT
RENT REVIEWS
RENTAL VALUE
ChD 26 March 1993. Following a reference to determine a rent review the arbitrator made his award of £332,700pa based on a rental value in relation to the net internal area of £12.07. The tenant appealed under Arbitration Act 1979 s1 to set aside the award under Arbitration Act 1950 s23 on the grounds that the arbitrators conclusion was contradicted when stating that he relied on a comparable whose rental value was £10.40. He had also disregarded improvements on the grounds that this did not affect the rental value. Held that there was no error in law by the arbitrator within the principles of "Edwards v Bairstow" even if he was at error in handling the comparables however his award was set aside and he was dismissed on the grounds that he had misconducted the proceedings by rejecting evidence put forward by the tenant notwithstanding that the evidence could have been objected to by the landlord, and was not, as inadmissible evidence.
ARBITRATION ACT 1950 S23
ARBITRATION ACT 1979 S1
ARBITRATORS' AWARDS
COMPARABLES
EVIDENCE
INADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE
MISCONDUCT
RENT REVIEWS
RENTAL VALUE