000			01506cab a2200193 4500
001			ABS46497
008			090401t1992 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u58555
041			_aeng
245			_aDamond Lock Grabowski & Partners v Laing Investments (Bracknell) Ltd
260			_c1992
350			_a0
490			_aConstruction Industry Law Letter _v1992 CILL 762-765(4)
520			_aORC 9 April 1992. L were the employers of a major project, D were the architects and C were the main contractors. Completion was delayed and C made a substantial claim for loss and expense. After consideration a payment of £288,000 was made by L to C. C considered this insufficient and commenced arbitration against L. L issued proceedings against C and L claiming against C a declaration that they had no contractual right to any further extension of time or loss and expense and against D damages for negligence and an indemnity against any claims of C`s which might be successful. L gave notice of arbitration to D and suggested that the same arbitrator be used, D objected however the same one was appointed. D objected again. The arbitrator continued with the arbitration and requested points of defence and counterclaims. D claimed misconduct by the arbitrator as he would not or could not fairly determine the issues in the arbitration on the evidence and arguements before him and kept req
650			_aLOSS AND EXPENSE
690			_aARBITRATION-CASE LAW
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c35774 _d35774