Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan app...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3981 to 4000 of 96136 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
SC held that contractual clauses excluding disputes from arbitration must be construed narrowly and consistently with the rule of law. Where liability itself is disputed, one party cannot finally decide its own alleged breach or negligence and then bar both court and arbitral review. Clause 3.20 was read as permitting finality only on quantification where liability is admitted; it did not exclude arbitration of a contested liability dispute. The arbitral tribunal therefore had jurisdiction, the award did not relate to an excepted matter, and the High Court erred in treating the dispute as non-arbitrable. The appeals were allowed and the award restored.
SC held that contractual clauses excluding disputes from arbitration must be construed narrowly and consistently with the rule of law. Where liability itself is disputed, one party cannot finally decide its own alleged breach or negligence and then bar both court and arbitral review. Clause 3.20 was read as permitting finality only on quantification where liability is admitted; it did not exclude arbitration of a contested liability dispute. The arbitral tribunal therefore had jurisdiction, the award did not relate to an excepted matter, and the High Court erred in treating the dispute as non-arbitrable. The appeals were allowed and the award restored.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
