McStay v Assicurazione Generali S.P.A.

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 23 June 1989
• Date: 23 June 1989
• Docket Number: [1988 No. 1037 Sp.]
• Court: High Court

McStay v. Assicurazione Generali S.P.A.

In the Matter of the Arbitration Acts, 1954 to 1980. John McStay (Receiver of the Holyrood Hotel Ltd.)

Plaintiff

and

Assicurazione Generali S.P.A. and Peter Maguire

Defendants

[1988 No. 1037 Sp.]

High Court

Arbitration - Whether arbitrator had jurisdiction to award interest - Special case stated - Whether High Court can direct special case to be stated after award announced.

Arbitration - Whether arbitrator had jurisdiction to award interest - Error of law - Whether decision reached on a specific question referred can constitute an error of law - Arbitration Act, 1954 (No. 26), s. 35.

The plaintiff in the arbitration of an insurance claim claimed, inter alia, interest on the amounts found due. The arbitrator found that he did not have jurisdiction to adjudicate on the claim for interest. The plaintiff applied to the High Court for an order directing the arbitrator to state a special case to the High Court to determine whether the arbitrator had jurisdiction to award interest or alternatively for an order remitting the relevant portion of the award to the arbitrator for his reconsideration.

Held by the High Court, Carroll J., in refusing the plaintiff's application, 1, that the power of the court to direct a special case stated must be exercised before the arbitrator's award was announced and the arbitrator became functus officio.

2. That the court should be slow to interfere with the finality of an arbitrator's award by exercising its common law power to remit or to set aside an award if there is an error of law on the face of it.

Keenan v. Shield Insurance Co. Ltd.[1988] I.R. 89 approved.

3. That, if a specific question of law was referred to the arbitrator for his decision and he decided it, the fact that the decision was erroneous did not make the award bad on its face so as to permit it being set aside.

In re King and Duveen[1913] 2 K.B. 32 applied.

Cases referred to in this report:—

Keenan v. Shield Insurance Co. Ltd.[1988] I.R. 89.

In re King and Duveen[1913] 2 K.B. 32; (1913) 82 L.J.K.B. 733; (1913) 108 L.T. 844.

Special summons.

By special summons dated the 20th December, 1988, the plaintiff sought an order of the High Court directing the second defendant (who had been the arbitrator in an arbitration between the plaintiff and the first defendant) to state a case for the consideration of the High Court on the question of whether the second defendant, as arbitrator, had had jurisdiction to award interest on the sum awarded. Alternatively, the plaintiff sought an order remitting the portion of the award which was concerned with the determination as to his jurisdiction to award...