Confirms that an arbitrator who, drawing on their own expertise, identifies an alternative approach not raised by either party and calls for further evidence and submissions on it does not breach s 18 of the Commercial Arbitration Act 2010 (NSW), provided both parties are given a reasonable opportunity to respond. Practitioners resisting enforcement on procedural fairness grounds must demonstrate real unfairness or practical injustice, not merely that the arbitrator's procedural decisions disadvantaged a forensic strategy.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.