STERLING V RAND AND ANOTHER

[2019] EWHC 2560 (Ch), Chancery Division, Clare Ambrose, 1 October 2019

Arbitration – Power of tribunal – Order for specific enforcement – Enforcement of award – Waiver of right to challenge jurisdiction – Public policy – Arbitration Act 1996, sections 30, 48, 66, 68, 73 and 81

In July 2007 the defendants mortgaged a property in London for £640,000. On 19 March 2008 the parties entered into an agreement (the Heskem) under which the house was to be transferred to the claimant for £745,000. However, because there was a penalty for early termination of the mortgage, the title was not to be transferred to the claimant for two years and instead he would take over responsibility for paying the mortgage in that period. Because the claimant was not to become owner for two years, in June 2008 the defendants signed a declaration of trust stating that they held the property beneficially for the claimant’s nominee Mr Stern. A dispute as to title then arose, and it was referred to the Beth Din as arbitrator. The dispute was to be resolved under Jewish law. The Beth Din by its award in January 2015 held that the Heskem was binding, that Mr Stern was the claimant’s nominee and that the claimant was entitled to have the property transferred to him or to Mr Stern provided that the claimant discharged the existing mortgage. In the present action the claimant sought permission to enforce the award under section 66 of the Arbitration Act 1996.