In complex commercial arbitrations under the Commercial Arbitration Act 1984 (Vic) involving conflicting expert evidence and substantial submissions, arbitrators must provide reasons that condescend to an intelligible explanation of why one body of evidence was preferred over the other and why substantial submissions were accepted or rejected. The standard of reasons is set by the nature of the dispute, not the qualifications of the arbitrator. Failure to meet this standard constitutes both error of law on the face of the award under s 38 and technical misconduct under s 42. Post-1996 English arbitration authorities on 'serious irregularity' are not applicable to the Victorian 1984 Act.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 26 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 26 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.