Abstract

14 June 2004 Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, and Dame Sian Elias Privy Council [2004] UKPC 29 [2004] ArbLR 12 Arbitration award--Appeal--Question of law--Joint venture--Arbitrator ordering payment by joint venture and one partner to another partner-- Whether partner may claim monies paid to firm other than through a partnership action (yes) Arbitration award--Appeal--Question of law--Costs--Sole arbitrator apportioning costs despite parties' agreement to `share equally' the arbitrator's costs--Whether agreement that parties would bear costs on an equal basis (no) Arbitration award--Enforcement--Award remitted to arbitrator--Arbitrator amending provisions ordering payment--Whether `new' award (no)-- Whether fresh enforcement proceedings required (no) Arbitration award--Challenge--Procedural irregularity--Misconduct-- Arbitrator refusing to state a case for the court as to whether joint venture created a partnership--Whether refusal misconduct (no) Partnership remedies no longer available after disputes resolved by arbitration Carter and Simpson concluded a partnership agreement to provide architectural services in relation to the construction of the Montego Bay Civic Centre. Disputes arose and were referred to arbitration. The sole arbitrator issued an award ordering Carter to pay Simpson J$3,741,317.65 and dismissing Carter's counterclaim. The arbitrator also gave directions for the termination of the joint venture: within sixty days