000			01295cab a2200277 4500
001			ABS50369
008			090401t1994 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u75457
041			_aeng
245			_aCohen and others v Baram
260			_c1994
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v1994 13 EG 111-114(4)
520			_aCA 24 November 1993. Appellants claim that the successful party in an arbitration award is entitled to defend claim by arbitrators for fees and expenses on the grounds that the arbitrators` award of costs is wrong was dismissed. Accepted that parties to an arbitration should bear costs. The appellants` remedy in respect of the alleged failure by the arbitrators to exercise their judicial discretion on costs should have been raised under Arbitration Act 1979 s1 or Arbitration Act 1950 s22 as prescribed by the Rules of the Supreme Court Order 73.
650			_aARBITRATION ACT 1950
650			_aARBITRATION ACT 1979
650			_aARBITRATION AWARDS
650			_aBETH DIN
650			_aCOSTS
650			_aFEES
650			_aJEWISH LAW
650			_aRULES OF SUPREME COURT ORD 73
690			_aMANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ARBITRATION
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c47500 _d47500