No jurisdiction to permit a counterclaim in proceedings for leave to enforce New York Convention award (Selevision v BMG)

Article summary

Arbitration analysis: Does the court have jurisdiction to permit a defendant to issue and serve a CPR Part 20 counterclaim in the context of proceedings for permission to enforce a New York Convention award? The High Court says ‘no’. Mr Justice Butcher in the Commercial Court held that ‘that the correct reading of the relevant Rules is that CPR 8.7 is not part of the procedure for applications for enforcement of awards under CPR 62.18, and Part 20 claims may not be brought within them’. Practitioners may also be interested in Butcher J’s obiter comments that the court does have jurisdiction to grant a stay of enforcement of a New York Convention award beyond the circumstances referred to in section 103(5) of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996), although the court’s exercise of that discretion will rarely if ever be appropriate (and it was not appropriate in this case). Written by Andrew Stafford...