Viterra Operations Ltd (T/A ABB Grain Storage & Handling) v Ewing International Limited Partnership
Case
•
[2011] SASCFC 13
•11 March 2011
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Viterra Operations Ltd (T/A ABB Grain Storage & Handling) v Ewing International Limited Partnership [2011] SASCFC 13
[2011] SASCFC 13
11 March 2011
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Viterra Operations Ltd (T/A ABB Grain Storage & Handling) sought permission to appeal an interlocutory judgment of a single judge of the Supreme Court of South Australia. The underlying dispute concerned an arbitration award made in favour of Ewing International Limited Partnership.
The primary legal issue before the Full Court was whether it was open to the primary judge to conclude that there was a manifest error of law on the face of the arbitration award, thereby granting leave to appeal. The Full Court was required to consider the criteria for granting leave to appeal from an interlocutory judgment in this context.
The Full Court reasoned that the threshold for demonstrating a manifest error of law on the face of an award is a high one. It held that the primary judge had erred in finding such an error. The Court applied the principles governing appeals from interlocutory judgments and the limited grounds upon which an appeal from an arbitration award may be permitted, emphasizing that mere disagreement with the arbitrator's findings or interpretation of the evidence does not constitute a manifest error of law.
Permission to appeal was refused.
The primary legal issue before the Full Court was whether it was open to the primary judge to conclude that there was a manifest error of law on the face of the arbitration award, thereby granting leave to appeal. The Full Court was required to consider the criteria for granting leave to appeal from an interlocutory judgment in this context.
The Full Court reasoned that the threshold for demonstrating a manifest error of law on the face of an award is a high one. It held that the primary judge had erred in finding such an error. The Court applied the principles governing appeals from interlocutory judgments and the limited grounds upon which an appeal from an arbitration award may be permitted, emphasizing that mere disagreement with the arbitrator's findings or interpretation of the evidence does not constitute a manifest error of law.
Permission to appeal was refused.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
-
Commercial Law
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Judicial Review
-
Jurisdiction
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
1