Dyer v Dawson
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1846 |
| Date | 01 January 1846 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 47 E.R. 929
COURTS OF THE LORD CHANCELLOR
dyer v. dawson. Where award under agreement nut of Court, and not under statute, fraud of the parties interested and misconduct of the arbitrators cannot be reached at law.- sir john LEACH. Where an agreement of reference takes place out of Court, and there is no clause that the submission shall be made a rule of Court, the award not being under the statute, fraud of the parties interested in the award, or misconduct of the arbitrators making it, cannot be reached at law. You cannot plead such fraud or misconduct to an action on the award. Neither can you in an action on the award go into evidence to prove such fraud or misconduct.-Dyer v. Dawson, V.-C. April 1822. Question as to performance of an award, in pitrsuance of an order of the Court in a cause there depending, being enforced by the Court without the, award itself being made an order of the Court.-In Haggett v. Welsh, MS. Cases; S. C. 1 Sim. 134, Sir Anthony Hart said, that the performance of an award, in pursuance of an order of the Court in a cause there depending, may be enforced by the Court without the award itself being made an order of the Court. In Ormond v. Kynnersley, 2 Sim. & Stu. 15, there was ati award under an order in the cause that a certain sum should be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiffs; and a motion was made on the part of the Plaintiffs that the award, if necessary, might be made a rule of Court, or if not necessary, then that the Defendant might be ordered to pay the sum [421] awarded. The registrar being consulted by the Court as to the necessity of having the award made a rule of Court, seemed to consider that it ought to be so, as the Court would not otherwise have any record of it. The motion was ordered to stand over that search might be made for authorities. On a subsequent day Sibley v. tfa/el before Lord Eldon, March 1812, and March 1814 was mentioned, in which the Court had enforced an award, made on an order taken by consent (in a cause) for a reference, without the award being made a rule of Court. Sir John Leach said, that that case was an express authority that the Court would enforce an award, made by virtue of an order of the Court (in a cause), without requiring that the award should be first made a rule of Court. His Honor therefore ordered payment of the money according to the award. lu Turner v. Turner, MS. Cases; S. C. 3 Kusa. 494, there was an order in the cause...
To continue reading
Request your trial