Australian Court Provides Guidance On Art 33(3) Of The Model Law, The Doctrine Of Functus Officio And When A Final Award Is Not Final

Victorian Supreme Court provides guidance on Art 33(3) of the Model Law, the doctrine of functus officio and when a ‘Final Award’ is not ‘final’

Herbert Smith Freehills review the Victorian Supreme Court’s 2017 decision in Blanalko Pty Ltd v Lysaght Building Solutions Pty Ltd [2017] VSC 97, where the Court confirmed that a party is not required to rely on, or comply with the time constraint in, Art 33(3) of the Model Law to obtain a further Award in circumstances where the arbitrator has made ‘a conscious decision not to deal with an issue’. The authors note that the decision also provides useful commentary on the functus officio doctrine and the circumstances in which an Award labelled ‘Final Award’ is not, relevantly, a ‘final Award.’

READ MORE

About Phillip Rompotis

Phillip practices as a barrister and arbitrator in Hong Kong. He has over 25 years’ litigation and arbitration experience in commercial disputes relating to construction & engineering, financial services, joint venture & shareholders agreements, technology, trusts, property and landlord & tenant. He is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, the Singapore Institute of Arbitrators, the Malaysian Institute of Arbitrators, and a member of various lists/panels of arbitrators.

View

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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