Leeds Permanent Building Society v Latchmere Properties Ltd
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (1989) 20 EG 128-134(4)Publication details: 1989Subject(s): Summary: ChD 9 November 1988. Application by tenants (L) for leave to apply and for consequential orders requiring a statement of reasons for an arbitration award. The award was unfavourable to L. The lease provided for arbitration on rent review s and the application arose following the second five-yearly review. The arbitrator (A) wrote to the parties informing them that unless a request was made by one of them, he would not state reasons for his award. The arbitration proceeded; neither party requested a reasoned award. L therefore had to satisfy the judge under the Arbitration Act 1979 s1(6)(b) that there was a "special reason" for the failure of L`s surveyor to give such notice sufficient to enable the court, in the event of an appeal, to consider any question of law arising out of the award. ChD had to consider 1) was there a special reason why notice was not given before the award that a reasoned award was required and 2) if so, should the judge exercise his discretion to grant the lea| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS40720 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 25713-1001 |
ChD 9 November 1988. Application by tenants (L) for leave to apply and for consequential orders requiring a statement of reasons for an arbitration award. The award was unfavourable to L. The lease provided for arbitration on rent review s and the application arose following the second five-yearly review. The arbitrator (A) wrote to the parties informing them that unless a request was made by one of them, he would not state reasons for his award. The arbitration proceeded; neither party requested a reasoned award. L therefore had to satisfy the judge under the Arbitration Act 1979 s1(6)(b) that there was a "special reason" for the failure of L`s surveyor to give such notice sufficient to enable the court, in the event of an appeal, to consider any question of law arising out of the award. ChD had to consider 1) was there a special reason why notice was not given before the award that a reasoned award was required and 2) if so, should the judge exercise his discretion to grant the lea