Minter Ellison review the 2017 decision from Queensland in Mango Boulevard Pty Ltd v Mio Art Pty Ltd [2017] QSC 87, where the Court held that a purchaser had not made out a case to set aside the relevant awards under s.34 of the Commercial Arbitration Act 2013, holding that despite the purchaser’s complaints about how the arbitrator had valued the purchase price of the shares, the arbitrator had not decided matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration. The authors note that the case provides clarity on the status of arbitral awards under the Commercial Arbitration Act 2013 (Qld) and confirms that Queensland is in line with other jurisdictions when reviewing arbitral awards.
Judicial Review And Awards – When Appropriate And When Final
