Written by Graham Perry

Graham Perry M.A. Cantab FCIArb Experienced Arbitration Lawyer | China & Chinese Business Affairs | Public Speaker/Lecturer

1 June 2021


Three points have emerged.
The new evidence is important.
Buyers’ new Executive came across the documents on a review of evidence.
Buyers’ solicitors then failed to send the new evidence earlier.

So Buyers’ advocate knows she is in difficulty as Sellers’ advocate heaps up pressure focusing on the two “own goals” by Buyers.
It is unfair to Sellers, he submits; there will be a delay whilst the new evidence is considered – maybe 8-12 weeks before the new hearing date is fixed. The relevant executive is uncontactable on a remote holiday island. Sellers are waiting for the money awarded at the first tier.

Buyers hit back – Advocate asserts fairness is the key issue. She acknowledges there has been a delay but deciding the appeal without access to new documents would be quite wrong. A big case. $1m+ in damages at stake. Not Buyers’ fault that Sellers’ responsible executive has decided to go snorkelling in Madagascar. Delay was avoidable if the New Executive was at the end of a phone. Exec has acted with disrespect to the Board. Only three pages of new documents. No delay if Exec is at his desk.

How to decide with S 33 in mind?

Episode 4 – 2 June 21



Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like…