Plaster Plus (Australia) Pty Ltd v ZHOU

Plaster Plus (Australia) Pty Ltd (the applicant) sought to enforce an arbitral award against Mr Zhou (the respondent) in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute concerned alleged breaches of a franchise agreement, which led to arbitration and an award in favour of Plaster Plus. Mr Zhou sought to set aside the award, or alternatively, to have it stayed pending further proceedings.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the arbitral award should be set aside or stayed pursuant to section 18 of the *International Arbitration Act 1974* (Cth) (the Act), which incorporates the grounds for setting aside an arbitral award under Article 34 of the UNCITRAL Model Law. Specifically, the Court had to consider whether Mr Zhou had established any of the grounds for setting aside, such as being unable to present his case or the award dealing with a dispute not contemplated by or not falling within the terms of the submission to arbitration.

Judge Burchardt found that Mr Zhou had failed to establish any of the grounds for setting aside the award under Article 34 of the Model Law. The Court noted that Mr Zhou had been given ample opportunity to present his case during the arbitration and that the arbitrator had not exceeded the scope of the arbitration agreement. The Court applied the principles that the grounds for setting aside an award are to be interpreted narrowly and that the burden of proof rests on the party seeking to set aside the award.

Consequently, the Court dismissed Mr Zhou's application to set aside the arbitral award and ordered that the award be enforced.