HAMPTON & COUNSEL

The parties to this proceeding were Hampton, the applicant, and Counsel, the respondent. The dispute concerned an application by Hampton to set aside an arbitration award made in favour of Counsel. The matter came before Macmillan J of the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the arbitration award should be set aside pursuant to section 34(2)(b)(ii) of the *Commercial Arbitration Act 2011* (Vic) on the grounds that the award was affected by fraud. Hampton alleged that Counsel had engaged in fraudulent conduct during the arbitration proceedings by presenting false evidence.

Macmillan J considered the high threshold required to establish fraud in the context of setting aside an arbitration award. His Honour noted that mere allegations of fraud were insufficient and that there needed to be clear and convincing evidence demonstrating that fraud had actually occurred and that it had materially affected the award. Applying the principles established in cases such as *Commonwealth of Australia v Bankinvest International Pty Ltd* and *Galea v Goulburn Mulwaree Council*, the court examined the evidence presented by Hampton. His Honour found that Hampton had failed to discharge the onus of proving fraud with the necessary degree of certainty.

Consequently, the application to set aside the arbitration award was dismissed.