000			01808cad a22002055a 4500
001			L142224
008			080130e20071102xxk f v 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u142224
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aPenwith District Council v VP Developments Ltd _h[electronic resource]
260			_c2007
520			_a[2007] EWHC 2544 (TCC). 2 November 2007. Contracts and agreements for work should be clear about fees and schedules of payments to avoid costly misunderstandings. The applicant local authority applied for leave to appeal against an interim award of damages made by an arbitrator in favour of the respondent contractor (V). The local authority employed V to supply windows in the maintenance of an estate. V asked for an interim payment which was refused, so V borrowed from the bank. V served notice of arbitration after the local authority failed to make full payment. The arbitrator made an award in favour of V with compound interest on the grounds that a loan and the interest on it was foreseeable from the pre-contract correspondence. The local authority argued that the arbitrator had acted irrationally. Held: Application refused. Only questions of law were appropriate subject for appeal, not challenging a finding of fact on the basis of it being unreasonable or irrational. There was no error of law; it was not for the court to decide its own view of the facts in lieu of the arbitrator.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aARBITRATION ACT 1979
650	2	4	_aPENWITH DC V VP DEVELOPMENTS
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aMANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ARBITRATION
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2007/2544.html _zView the judgment free of charge at www.bailii.org...
942			_n0
999			_c79752 _d79752