TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court invalidates arbitration award due to defective constitution. Importance of proper arbitrator appointment.</h1> The Court declared the award made by the Bengal Chamber of Commerce Tribunal consisting of Mr. Jamieson and Mr. Luke as invalid due to the defective ... - Issues:Validity of award by Bengal Chamber of Commerce TribunalAnalysis:The case involved an application to declare void and set aside an award made by the Bengal Chamber of Commerce Tribunal. The dispute arose from a contract dated 30-11-1951, which contained an arbitration clause referring disputes to the Bengal Chamber of Commerce under its Tribunal of Arbitration rules. The Tribunal's rules outlined the process for constituting a Court for arbitration and making awards within a specified timeframe.The Registrar constituted a Court on 6-6-1952, consisting of two arbitrators, Mr. J. I. Jamieson and Mr. I. D. C. Buist. The Court entered the reference on the same day, with an award deadline of 6-10-1952. However, due to delays and arbitrator substitution, the final award was made on 8-10-53 by Mr. Jamieson and Mr. Luke.The judgment highlighted the rules under which the Registrar was obligated to appoint new arbitrators if the appointed ones neglected to act or allowed the time to expire. Referring to Rule 7 and Rule 10, it was emphasized that the Registrar should have substituted and appointed new arbitrators in place of Mr. Jamieson and Mr. Buist when they failed to make the award within the stipulated time.The Court concluded that the award made by the Court consisting of Mr. Jamieson and Mr. Luke was invalid due to the defective constitution of the Court. It was held that the Registrar's failure to appoint a new arbitrator in place of Mr. Jamieson rendered the award void. The judgment declared the award null and void solely on the ground of the Court's defective constitution, without prejudice to other contentions raised in the application.Additionally, the respondent was directed to pay the costs of the application. The judgment focused on the procedural irregularity in the constitution of the arbitration Court, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the rules governing the appointment and substitution of arbitrators to maintain the validity of arbitration awards.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
