000			01472cab a2200193 4500
001			ABS44036
008			090401t1991 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u44963
041			_aeng
245			_aMF King (Holdings) plc v Thomas McKenna Ltd
260			_c1991
350			_a0
490			_aConstruction Industry Law Letter _v1991 CILL 631-634(4)
520			_aCA 20 December 1990. During an arbitration the employers (X) made a sealed offer . During the hearing X`s counsel made a tactical decision not to tell the arbiter that there was a sealed offer. They also did not believe that costs would be dealt with as the arbitrator had used the words "hold costs over". Counsel mistakenly believed this was enough to procure a further hearing. The arbitrator awarded the contractors (Y) less than the amount of the sealed offer but in ignorance of it made a final award awarding Y their costs. X applied to the commercial court for an order remitting the award to the arbitrator for reconsideration under Arbitration Act 1950 s22 . This was done and Y appealed. It was argued that s22 only applied in four specific circumstances where the award was bad on its face, where there had been misconduct on the part of the arbitrator, where there was an admitted mistake and the arbitrator asked for it to be remitted and where new evidence had been found. However it
650			_aCASE LAW
690			_aARBITRATION-CASE LAW
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c28580 _d28580