Menu Close
Halliburton v Chubb

On 27 November 2020, the much-anticipated judgment of the Supreme Court in Halliburton v Chubb regarding the test for disclosure by arbitrators of overlapping arbitral appointments with one common party, and apparent bias, was handed down.

It can be found here:

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2018-0100-judgment.pdf

The LMAA intervened in the case, represented by Nicholas Vineall QC and Andrew Stevens, and presented submissions to the Supreme Court as did the LCIA, ICC, GAFTA and CIArb.

We are pleased to say that the Supreme Court’s judgment accords with the LMAA’s position that the relevant test for the legal duty of disclosure should take into account the particular characteristics, circumstances, customs and practices of different fields of arbitration.  The Supreme Court recognised the particular characteristics of LMAA arbitration.

These characteristics and customs are in large part what has made arbitration under LMAA Terms a popular form of arbitration, seen as responding to the needs of all of its users.  The fact that the Supreme Court has taken account of such characteristics is in line with the IBA’s guidelines on conflicts of interest which have long distinguished maritime and other forms of arbitration in relation to certain matters of disclosure.

There are important points in the judgment both for LMAA arbitrators and users of LMAA arbitration to which careful consideration will be given.

Skip to toolbar