Arbitration Law, Reasoned opinion2
According to S34 under UK 1996 Act, and article 20 in LCIA rules Craigie shows an intention to
include an expert report prepared by Prof. Rzhavy as written evidence. Rzhavy has a wide
experience in the field of renewable energy. Feeglie is objected to the inclusion of any evidence
from Rzhavy on the ground that Rzhavy lacks impartiality and independence due to the existence
of a previous commercial relationship with Ms. Samovarova, an arbitration tribunal member
appointed by Feeglie, and Craigie as well. The tribunal has a duty and power of examining the
objection request received. This will be done by checking whether the pre-existing relationship
impacts the outcome of the report if this is the case, then Rzhavy report has to be put aside.
Under S1, and S33 from UK 1996 Act the tribunal has to care for the parties by acting fairly and
impartially by giving each one of them a chance to present his case and respond to the opponent's
insinuations, moreover, this duty is extended under S34 to include adopting appropriate
procedures suitable for each scenario to minimize the cost and delay. However, these provisions
constrain the tribunal's power in decision making though they are mandatory and can't be
ignored. Also, this duty shall be sustained throughout arbitration processes by reviewing
submissions, listening to explanations, adjudicating evidence, awarding the parties appropriately
and any other tribunal conduct. The parties to the arbitration can challenge any award reached
based on the existence of a serious irregularity or remove the arbitrator due to the existence of
circumstances resulting in justifiable doubts touching on their impartiality under S68, and S24
from UK 1996 Act respectively.
To begin by examining the relationship between Rzhavy and Samovarova against Feeglie’s
allegations which amount to a conflict of interest, and pose a risk to the arbitration outcome;
there are justifiable doubts as to Samovarova’s impartiality which can lead to substantial
injustice. The same test can be used by the public court since the arbitration involves a judicial
function as summarized by (topic 7 pages 4 refs) Lord Hope in Porter v Magill at para 103 in this
way:
“... whether the fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would
conclude that there was a real possibility that the tribunal was biased .."
However, lack of independence doesn't mean impartiality and if the test is applied on the
commercial relationship between Rzhavy and Samovarova yet it was terminated 10 years ago
and there is no financial interest (Reference topic 7 pages 16) currently between the two,

+13062052269

info@desklib.com

Arbitration Law Report 2022

Contribute Materials

Related Documents

INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION LAW CASE STUDY 2022