RESOLUTION ISSUE 17

May 2018

In this issue we look at what happens when a member of an arbitral tribunal fails to perform, enforcement of arbitration agreements against non-signatories, and securing the appointment of an arbitral tribunal in the absence of agreement.

We also look at whether there should be full and frank disclosure in international arbitration; and more.

In Case in Brief Mark Addison looks at the case of Al Azhari, Ihab v 27 Scott Street P/L & Ors [2017] VSC 600 which highlights the perils associated with drafting a binding and enforceable settlement agreement following mediation; and Frank Brown and Iain Stephenson discuss the recent High Court case of Honey Bees Preschool Limited v 127 Hobson Street Limited [2018] NZHC 32 which provides insight into how New Zealand Courts will approach the penalty doctrine.

CONTENTS

  • “Two out of three ain’t bad! Does it matter if a member of an arbitral tribunal does not actively participate?” by Sean Kelly and Jonathan Tong
  • Case in Brief – Double Edition – “Settling at mediation: be careful with the terms” by Mark Addison
  • “The Law According to Honey Bees: NZ takes stance on penalty doctrine law” by Frank Brown and Iain Stephenson
  • “Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements against Non-Signatories: which law (the chicken and the egg)?” by Albert Monichino QC
  • “Should there be full and frank disclosure in international arbitration?” by Matthew Knowles
  • “Securing the appointment of an arbitral tribunal in the absence of agreement: the default appointment procedures under the Arbitration Act 1996 – little understood and seldom properly followed” by John Green
  • “Companies Judge strikes out winding-up petition in favour of arbitration” by Jenny Zhuang and Richard Keady.