Samantha Manalo
- Comment
An exclusive deal
The respondent, Stainforth, obtained a loan from the appellant company, Lexi, to purchase a property. Stainforth had difficulty in re-financing the loan and asked Lexi if it knew of anyone who might be interested in buying the property. Lexi knew of a property investor who expressed an interest in buying ...
- Comment
A right to know
The first defendant, Alldown was engaged to carry out certain demolition and excavation works for the claimant, Shinedean’s premises. The excavation works caused the wall of an adjoining property to collapse. Alldown notified its Insurer, AXA of the collapsed wall in September 2002.
- Comment
Disputing the dispute
The applicant charterers Exfin applied to set aside an arbitration award in favour of the respondent ship-owners, Tolani for some US$130,000. Exfin argued that there was no “dispute” between the parties pursuant to the arbitration clause in the parties’ contract because Exfin had admitted the liability, the amount of the ...
- Comment
Say it in a letter
The claimant, ERDC was a contractor who carried out the construction of a new sport facility for the defendant, Brunel University. ERDC had tendered for the works on the basis of a JCT standard form of contract. The works were carried out under letters of intent pending formal execution ...
- Comment
Without warning
The respondent, Guinness was the majority shareholder in a UK company, CPL. The appellants, Kanoria commenced arbitration proceedings in India against Guinness and CPL, claiming that CPL had failed to pay a sum of money to Kanoria under a business agreement subject to Indian law.
- Comment
After the flood
The defendant water company, Thames Water admitted liability for loss and damage caused by water escaping from a burst water main. The water from the burst pipe damaged much of the valuable archives of Aerospace, a publishing company. Following the flood, Aerospace wished to restore the archives and asked ...
- Comment
The new balance of power
A dispute arose under a construction contract between the appellant architects, Roberts and the respondent developer, Parkcare. The construction contract incorporated the model adjudication procedure published by the Construction Industry Council subject to an amendment to clause 29 made by the RIBA standard conditions. The amended clause 29 provided that ...
- Comment
Those who trespass against us
The respondent, Bird built a boundary wall and fence that trespassed upon land belonging to his neighbour, the appellant Horsford. Horsford applied to the court for an injunction to remove the offending boundary wall and fence but his application was refused. Instead, the trial judge ordered Bird to pay Horsford ...
- Comment
In imminent danger
The defendant, Canary Wharf took out a project insurance policy with the claimant insurance company, Gerling for the construction of several buildings at Canary Wharf. During construction there was a serious accident involving a collapsed tower crane. Following the accident, Canary Wharf decided to use a different method to erect ...
- Comment
An irregular challenge
The claimant construction company, Kharafi was the main contractor for airport construction works in Ethiopia. Kharafi engaged Protech as earthworks subcontractor. Kharafi terminated the subcontract before the earthworks were completed and Protech made various claims that were referred to arbitration. The arbitrator made several awards in Protech’s favour including a ...