In order to deliver a personalised, responsive service and to improve the site, we remember and store information about how you use it. This is done using simple text files called cookies which sit on your computer. By continuing to use this site and access its features, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
To find out more about the way Informa Law uses cookies please go to our Cookie Policy page. Close

Serious irregularity: disregard of evidence

Arbitration Law Monthly

Serious irregularity: disregard of evidence

Pulis v Crystal Palace Football Club [2016] EWHC 2999 (Comm) appears to be yet another case where the serious irregularity challenges set out in section 68(2) of the Arbitration Act 1996 were invoked in an attempt to rerun the arbitration in court. The challenges were based on failure by the arbitrators to set out detailed reasons in their award for dismissing the claimant’s arguments, leading to allegations of unfairness in the procedure (section 68(2)(a)) and failure to determine all of the issues put to them (section 68(2)(d)).

Sir Michael Burton saw nothing in the claimant’s arguments, again confirming that section 68 is to be used in exceptional circumstances only, that awards are not required to deal with every point in detail and that even if there is a breach then there is no remedy if the breach did not affect the ultimate outcome.

The rest of this document is only available to i-law.com online subscribers.

If you are already a subscriber, please enter your details below to log in.

Enter your email address to log in as a user on your corporate account.
Remember me on this computer

Not yet an i-law subscriber?

Devices

Request a trial Find out more