Image from Google Jackets

Arbitration awards: time limits

Series: Arbitration Law Monthly ; 1(4) May 2001, 4-5(2)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Summary: Discusses "John Mowlem Construction Plc v SoS Defence" where the court was asked to decide whether a reference to arbitration was valid if it was clear that the dispute could not be resolved within the time period agreed by the parties. The judge dismissed the defendant's arguments on the grounds that there was no indication that the procedural requirements laid down in the contract were intended to limit what was a basic unrestricted arbitration clause, and because of the practical problems and extraordinary results that such an arrangement could have resulted in. It was also ruled that in order to remove the powers of the courts to extend time under the Arbitration Act 1996 s50 and s79 the agreement would need to be clear contract out of the Act, which was not the case with the agreement in question.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Journal article London Journal article X113330 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 113330-1001

Discusses "John Mowlem Construction Plc v SoS Defence" where the court was asked to decide whether a reference to arbitration was valid if it was clear that the dispute could not be resolved within the time period agreed by the parties. The judge dismissed the defendant's arguments on the grounds that there was no indication that the procedural requirements laid down in the contract were intended to limit what was a basic unrestricted arbitration clause, and because of the practical problems and extraordinary results that such an arrangement could have resulted in. It was also ruled that in order to remove the powers of the courts to extend time under the Arbitration Act 1996 s50 and s79 the agreement would need to be clear contract out of the Act, which was not the case with the agreement in question.

Previous
Back to results
Next
Close