Key Facts
- •Contract for sale of land contained an expert determination clause (clause 28) for resolving disputes.
- •Claimant terminated the contract and claimed deposit repayment.
- •Defendants sought a stay to proceed with expert determination.
- •Claimant argued expert determination was unsuitable and the clause wasn't separable from the terminated contract.
- •Dispute centered on whether a Practical Completion Statement was validly issued, impacting contract termination.
- •A geotechnical report raised concerns about the land's condition (LEAP Report).
Legal Principles
Separability of expert determination clauses.
None directly on point; case law on arbitration clauses considered by analogy.
Construction of expert determination clauses.
Fiona Trust & Holding Corpn v Privalov; Barclays Bank plc v Nylon Capital LLP; DHL Project & Chartering Ltd v Gemini Ocean Shipping Co Ltd
Court's discretion to refuse a stay for expert determination.
Cott UK Ltd v FE Barber Ltd; Channel Tunnel Group Ltd v Balfour Beatty Construction Ltd
Review of expert determination decisions.
Nylon Capital
Outcomes
Defendants' application for a stay granted.
The court found the expert determination clause (clause 28) to be a comprehensive, separable provision covering all disputes under the contract. The claimant failed to demonstrate the unsuitability of the expert determination process for the dispute, despite arguing complexity.