Goh v Ren

Goh (the applicant) sought judicial review of an arbitration award made in favour of Ren (the respondent). The dispute concerned a contract for the sale of land. The applicant sought to set aside the award on the grounds of alleged procedural unfairness and apprehended bias on the part of the arbitrator. The matter came before Wilson J of the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the arbitrator had failed to afford the applicant a fair hearing, thereby breaching the principles of natural justice. This involved an examination of the arbitrator's conduct in managing the arbitration proceedings, specifically concerning the timetable for the filing of documents and the opportunity for parties to be heard on such matters. The Court also considered whether there was any evidence to support the applicant's claim of apprehended bias.

Wilson J found that while the arbitrator had made some procedural decisions, there was insufficient evidence to establish actual bias. However, the Court determined that the arbitrator had not adequately ensured that the applicant had a sufficient opportunity to present its case in relation to the timetable for the filing of documents. Consequently, the Court concluded that the arbitration had not been conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice.

The Court ordered that the arbitrator must conduct a further preliminary conference to determine a timetable for the filing of documents, with both parties being heard. The arbitration was to resume forthwith to address these procedural matters and was to be concluded, with the award registered, by 15 February 2021. A further hearing was listed before Wilson J on that date.