Cunningham-Reid and another v Buchanan-Jardine
Cunningham-Reid and another v Buchanan-Jardine
- 1987
- Construction Industry Law Letter (1987) CILL 368(1) .
ChD 23 June 1987 The defendant, an interior designer had contracted to carry out work in the plaintiffs` home and in the contract between them, any disputes or differences were to be referred to arbitration. The plaintiffs issued a writ in the High Court alleging that the defendant was guilty of fraud and relying on the High Court`s discretion under the Arbitration Act 1950 , the defendant sought an order to stay the court proceedings so that the dispute could be put to arbitration. ChD held that although there was a serious charge of fraud in this case, there was no good reason why the normal course of allowing the matter to proceed to arbitration as originally agreed by the two parties should not be adopted. The defendant was entitled to insist that the dispute be determined by arbitration rather than be exposed to the possible adverse possibility which legal proceedings would cause.
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
ChD 23 June 1987 The defendant, an interior designer had contracted to carry out work in the plaintiffs` home and in the contract between them, any disputes or differences were to be referred to arbitration. The plaintiffs issued a writ in the High Court alleging that the defendant was guilty of fraud and relying on the High Court`s discretion under the Arbitration Act 1950 , the defendant sought an order to stay the court proceedings so that the dispute could be put to arbitration. ChD held that although there was a serious charge of fraud in this case, there was no good reason why the normal course of allowing the matter to proceed to arbitration as originally agreed by the two parties should not be adopted. The defendant was entitled to insist that the dispute be determined by arbitration rather than be exposed to the possible adverse possibility which legal proceedings would cause.
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE