Atlantis, an international trading company, and the owners of the shipThe HM Greenfieldproceed to arbitration over a dispute in relation to damaged goods. The parties' arbitration agreement provided for disputes to be heard by a panel of three arbitrators and provided that the UNCITRAL Rules would govern the arbitration.

Question 2a

At the beginning of the arbitration, Atlantis nominate Mr Jahem Patel and the shipowners nominate Mr Edward Smith to be panel members. Atlantis decide they wish to challenge the appointment of Smith, who was selected by the shipowners. The grounds for seeking Smith's removal are that he had previously been on an arbitral panel in another case involving the owners ofThe HM Greenfieldand he had decided technical issues in favour of the shipowners, whereas the other two arbitrators in that earlier case had decided against the shipowners. Mr Smith did not disclose this fact. Atlantis submit that this suggests the arbitrator had a bias towards the shipowners.

Advise Atlantis as to their prospects of success if they seek to challenge Mr Smith's appointment.

Question 2b

Assume that Atlantis challenge Mr Smith and he elects to step aside. The shipowners nominate a new arbitrator. The two arbitrators then decide on the third panel member who will be the panel chair.

On the first day of oral hearings, a lawyer for the shipowner hears the CEO of Atlantis talking to the chair of the panel. The CEO said he recalled she was the toughest teacher he had in law school. The arbitration proceeds and an award is made in favour of Atlantis.

The shipowners refuse to pay, claiming that the award is invalid because the CEO of Atlantis and the chair of the panel had a prior relationship when the CEO was a university student. The shipowners claim the chair was biased and could not have rendered a fair award.

Advise Atlantis as to the prospects of success should they bring an action under the New York Convention to enforce the award.

Answer text