Grangeford Structures Ltd v S. H. Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: MR JUSTICE DECLAN COSTELLO
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1988
• Neutral Citation: 1987 WJSC-HC 746
• Date: 01 January 1988
• Court: High Court

1987 WJSC-HC 746

THE HIGH COURT

No. 20 Sp/1987

GRANGEFORD STRUCTURES LTD v. S H LTD

IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION ACTS 1954 TO 1980

GRANGEFORD STRUCTURES LIMITED(In Liquidation)

and

S.H. LIMITED

Citations:

ARBITRATION ACT 1954 S41

BREMER VULKAN V SOUTH INDIA SHIPPING 1981 1 AER 289

Synopsis:

ARBITRATION

Procedure

Reference - Hearing - Adjournment - Refusal - Reasonableness - Hearing in absence of party - On 2/8/85 the arbitrator directed the plaintiffs to file their claim before 26/8/85 and directed the defendants to file their reply, and counter-claim (if any), before 24/9/85 - On 26/8 the plaintiffs filed their claim and the defendants filed their reply on 24/9 - On 6/11 the defendants informed the arbitrator that they were preparing a counter-claim - As no counter-claim was filed, the arbitrator informed the defendants that an amended reply and the counter-claim must be filed by 11/2/86 - The defendants failed to comply with those directions - On 4/2/86 the arbitrator informed the parties that the hearing would take place on 7/3/86 - On 5/3 the defendants informed the arbitrator that their counter-claim was not yet ready - On 7/3 the arbitrator, having allowed a short adjournment, insisted upon commencing the hearing on that afternoon, whereupon the defendants left the meeting - By his award dated 14/4/86 the arbitrator awarded the plaintiffs #18,330 damages and costs - The defendants failed to satisfy the award - The plaintiffs applied to the High Court, pursuant to s.41 of the Act of 1954, for leave to enforce the award, and the defendants applied for an extension of the period allowed for applying for an order setting aside the award - Held that the actions of the arbitrator had been reasonable and that he had jurisdiction, in the circumstances, to continue the hearing in the absence of the defendants - Held that there had been no misconduct of the proceedings and that the award should be enforced - Held that the defendants had not established a reason for granting such extension of time - Arbitration Act, 1954, ss.38, 41 - (1987/20 Sp - Costello J. - 26/3/87) - [1988] ILRM 129

|Grangeford Structures v. S.H. Ltd.|

NATURAL JUSTICE

Fair procedures

Party - Absence - Arbitration - Reference - Hearing - Continuation - Arbitrator's award upheld - ~See~ Arbitration, procedure - (1987/20 Sp - Costello J. - 26/3/87) - [1988] ILRM 129

|Grangeford Structures v. S.H. Ltd.|

1 JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE DECLAN COSTELLO ON 26TH MARCH 1987

APPEARANCES

Eoin McCullough, BL)

for Grangeford Structures Limited

Instructed by

Esmond A Reilly & Co.

8 Ontaric Terrace

Dublin 6

John O'Connor, BL)

for S.H. Limited

Instructed by

Giles J Kennedy & Co.

81 Eccles Street

Dublin 7

2 A company called Grangeford Structures Limited, which is now in liquidation, was the main contractor in relation to a large development involving the construction of a shopping centre in Bray.

3 Grangeford Structures Limited entered into a subcontract on 26th September 1983 with S.H. Limited in respect of the precast concrete work on the site. The contract contained an arbitration clause. A dispute having arisen in relation to a claim made by Grangeford Structures Limited against S.H. Limited, a reference to arbitration took place and Mr David Kelly was, in default of agreement, appointed arbitrator. His award is dated 14th April 1986 and by this he awarded in favour of Grangeford Structures Limited the sum of £18,330.53p together with arbitration costs of £1,943.75p.

4 On 3rd September 1986 this award was forwarded to S.H. Limited. Payment not having been forthcoming, Grangeford Structures Limited instituted these proceedings pursuant to the provisions of Section 41of the 1954 Act by a Special Summons on 10th February 1987 seeking liberty to enforce the award.

5 On the next day by a Summons of 11th February 1987 S.H. Limited applied to the Court claiming that the arbitration was a nullity; that the award had been obtained as a result of misconduct; that there was an error of law on its face, and claiming, inter alia, for an order extending the time to apply to have the award set aside on the grounds of misconduct.

6 An order was made consolidating the two sets of proceedings and I have heard the consolidated action today.

7 The claims made by S.H. Limited in these proceedings are claims which are based upon circumstances which are common to them all and they arise because of what is suggested was the wrongful conduct of the arbitrator. It is claimed that his wrongful conduct amounted to misconduct and that the arbitration which he held was a nullity. So it will suffice for the conclusion which I have reached on all the claims in the claim made by S.H. Limited if I briefly outline the relevant facts in this matter.

8 The Arbitrator, having been appointed, was in correspondence with the parties and on 2nd August 1985 the correspondence which is relevant to these proceedings commenced. On that date the Arbitrator issued directions to the parties requesting that points of claim be filed by Grangeford Structures Limited by the 26th August and a reply and counterclaim, if any, be filed by S.H. Limited by the 24th September. The parties complied with this direction.

9 On 24th August 1986 Grangeford Structures Limited filed its claim and it was a detailed claim.

10 On 24th September 1985 a...