Citation: All ER (D) 315 TCC, [2008] BLR 366 TCC and [2008] EWHC 817 (TCC)
Nature of case: This litigation concerned an application to challenge an award for serious irregularity out of time (by 66 days) and whether the delay could be excused by reference to the failure of the other side’s solicitor to respond to a letter concerning alleged omissions in disclosure. The court made a statement on the principles for considering applications to extend time limits under the Arbitration Act: a weak case would add weight to the party resisting the application, a strong case would militate in favour of an extension. A case which was neither weak nor strong would be insufficient to add significant weight to the application. On these facts, the application should have been brought within the time limit. Deliberate withholding of documents ordered to be produced might be reprehensible and contrary to public policy, but not where there was no such order.
