Lieschke v Lieschke

[2023] NSWCA 241

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Commercial Arbitration
2. › Setting aside arbitral award
3. › Inability to present case
4. › Reasonable opportunity to present case
5. › Whether party denied reasonable opportunity where party possessed material to amend pleadings but chose not to
6. › Whether attempt to introduce new case through expert conclave constituted denial of opportunity
7. › Commercial Arbitration Act 2010 (NSW), ss 18, 23(1), 23(3), 34(2)(a)(ii), 34(2)(b)(ii)
1. Commercial Arbitration
2. › Setting aside arbitral award
3. › Public policy
4. › Real practical injustice
5. › Whether award in conflict with public policy where party's own strategic choices led to inability to advance new case
6. › Commercial Arbitration Act 2010 (NSW), s 34(2)(b)(ii)
1. Commercial Arbitration
2. › Conduct of arbitral proceedings
3. › Statements of claim and defence
4. › Role of s 23(1) statements in defining party's case and issues in dispute
5. › Scope of amendment under s 23(3)
6. › Whether party's case extends beyond documents filed under s 23(1)
7. › Commercial Arbitration Act 2010 (NSW), ss 23(1), 23(3)

Quick Take

A party in domestic arbitration who possesses material to support a new case but fails to apply to amend their statement under s 23(3) cannot later claim they were denied a reasonable opportunity to present that case, and attempting to introduce a fundamentally different case through an expert conclave without amending pleadings will not be protected by s 18.