000			02131cab a2200205 4500
001			##L133654
008			060530n2005 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u133654
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aTTMI Ltd of England v ASM Shipping Ltd of India
260			_c2005
520			_a[2005] EWHC 2666 (Comm), 23 November 2005. T chartered a vessel from A which arrived late at the nominated load port. When T claimed substantial losses, and A counterclaimed, the dispute was referred to an arbitrator, X. During the hearing, A discovered that X had previously been instructed by T's solicitors in a matter in which serious allegations had been made against M, one of A's witnesses. A objected to X's further participation, pointing out that the allegations against M in the previous case had included the production of fraudulent documents. X refused to stand down, arguing that the objection ought to have been made before M started to give evidence. A partial award was made. A argued that the award should be set aside on the grounds of bias. "Held" a party wishing to raise an objection to arbitration proceedings must do so as soon as it becomes aware of the issue in question. In view of the tight timescale involved, A had not waived its rights to object to possible bias by permitting M to give evidence. When X refused to stand down, however, A should have made an immediate application for his removal under the Arbitration Act 1996, s24. Instead, A had taken up the partial award that was made, although continuing to object by correspondence. By taking up the award, A had lost the right to object to X's continuance in the arbitration.
650	2	4	_aTTMI LTD OF ENGLAND V ASM SHIPPING LTD OF INDIA
650	2	4	_aARBITRATION ACT 1996 S24
650	2	4	_aARBITRATION ACT 1996 S73
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aMANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ARBITRATION-ARBITRATORS
856	4	1	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2005/2666.html _zView the item free of charge at www.bailii.org...
942			_n0
999			_c77132 _d77132