Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Thyssen Canada Ltd v Mariana Maritime SA and Anr

Thyssen Canada Ltd v Mariana Maritime SA and Anr 23 February 2005 Cooke J Commercial Court [2005] EWHC 219 [2005] ArbLR 62 Arbitration award--Challenge--Fraud--Public policy--Arbitrators rendering decision on cause of fire in first award--Claimant subsequently obtaining evidence of cause of fire and conspiracy to destroy evidence by ship owners-- Whether ship owners' case in arbitration false and based on perjured evidence-- Claimant aware of new evidence before publication of award--Claimant deciding not to use new evidence or to investigate--Whether award obtained by fraud or in manner contrary to public policy (no)--Whether procedural irregularity (no)--Arbitration Act 1996, s 68(2)(g) Arbitration award--Challenge--Loss of rights--Claimant aware of new evidence of perjury before publication of award--Claimant deciding not to use new evidence or to investigate--Claimant continuing to participate in the arbitration--Claimant investigating and raising objections only after publication of first award--Whether loss of rights (yes)--Arbitration Act 1996, s 73 Arbitration award--Challenge--Extension of time--New evidence--Claimant applying to set aside award five months out of time--Claimant relying on knowledge and evidence available prior to publication of the award--Claimant deliberately deciding not to raise objections during arbitration--Whether to extend time (no)--Arbitration Act 1996, ss 70(3) and 80(5) Party cannot rely on evidence of fraud deliberately ignored during arbitration Thyssen, as cargo owners, claimed damages http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arbitration Law Reports and Review Oxford University Press

Thyssen Canada Ltd v Mariana Maritime SA and Anr

Arbitration Law Reports and Review , Volume 2005 (1) – Jan 1, 2005

Thyssen Canada Ltd v Mariana Maritime SA and Anr

Arbitration Law Reports and Review , Volume 2005 (1) – Jan 1, 2005

Abstract

23 February 2005 Cooke J Commercial Court [2005] EWHC 219 [2005] ArbLR 62 Arbitration award--Challenge--Fraud--Public policy--Arbitrators rendering decision on cause of fire in first award--Claimant subsequently obtaining evidence of cause of fire and conspiracy to destroy evidence by ship owners-- Whether ship owners' case in arbitration false and based on perjured evidence-- Claimant aware of new evidence before publication of award--Claimant deciding not to use new evidence or to investigate--Whether award obtained by fraud or in manner contrary to public policy (no)--Whether procedural irregularity (no)--Arbitration Act 1996, s 68(2)(g) Arbitration award--Challenge--Loss of rights--Claimant aware of new evidence of perjury before publication of award--Claimant deciding not to use new evidence or to investigate--Claimant continuing to participate in the arbitration--Claimant investigating and raising objections only after publication of first award--Whether loss of rights (yes)--Arbitration Act 1996, s 73 Arbitration award--Challenge--Extension of time--New evidence--Claimant applying to set aside award five months out of time--Claimant relying on knowledge and evidence available prior to publication of the award--Claimant deliberately deciding not to raise objections during arbitration--Whether to extend time (no)--Arbitration Act 1996, ss 70(3) and 80(5) Party cannot rely on evidence of fraud deliberately ignored during arbitration Thyssen, as cargo owners, claimed damages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/thyssen-canada-ltd-v-mariana-maritime-sa-and-anr-Ayhg3XE0qj
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© Oxford University Press, 2009
Subject
Judgments
ISSN
2044-8651
eISSN
2044-9887
DOI
10.1093/alrr/2005.1.915
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

23 February 2005 Cooke J Commercial Court [2005] EWHC 219 [2005] ArbLR 62 Arbitration award--Challenge--Fraud--Public policy--Arbitrators rendering decision on cause of fire in first award--Claimant subsequently obtaining evidence of cause of fire and conspiracy to destroy evidence by ship owners-- Whether ship owners' case in arbitration false and based on perjured evidence-- Claimant aware of new evidence before publication of award--Claimant deciding not to use new evidence or to investigate--Whether award obtained by fraud or in manner contrary to public policy (no)--Whether procedural irregularity (no)--Arbitration Act 1996, s 68(2)(g) Arbitration award--Challenge--Loss of rights--Claimant aware of new evidence of perjury before publication of award--Claimant deciding not to use new evidence or to investigate--Claimant continuing to participate in the arbitration--Claimant investigating and raising objections only after publication of first award--Whether loss of rights (yes)--Arbitration Act 1996, s 73 Arbitration award--Challenge--Extension of time--New evidence--Claimant applying to set aside award five months out of time--Claimant relying on knowledge and evidence available prior to publication of the award--Claimant deliberately deciding not to raise objections during arbitration--Whether to extend time (no)--Arbitration Act 1996, ss 70(3) and 80(5) Party cannot rely on evidence of fraud deliberately ignored during arbitration Thyssen, as cargo owners, claimed damages

Journal

Arbitration Law Reports and ReviewOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2005

There are no references for this article.