Salford Estates (No.2) Ltd v Altomart Ltd
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
- LORD JUSTICE LONGMORE
- LORD JUSTICE KITCHIN
Areas of Law
- Alternative dispute resolution
- Civil Procedure
- Corporate Law
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Court of Appeal, led by The Chancellor (Sir Terence Etherton), considered whether the mandatory stay in section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 applies to a winding-up petition grounded on an unpaid debt under a lease with a broad arbitration clause. Salford Estates (No 2) Limited, landlord and owner of Salford shopping centre, obtained an arbitral award against its tenant, Altomart Limited, for service charge and insurance rent arrears, then presented a petition asserting £92,032.33 including disputed sums for a subsequent year. Judge Bird stayed the petition relying on Rusant and Halki. On appeal, the Court held section 9 does not apply to insolvency petitions because they are not claims for payment and implicate public-interest remedies. Nonetheless, the Court affirmed that the petition should be dismissed or stayed as a matter of discretion under Insolvency Act 1986 section 122(1)(f), to honor the parties’ arbitration agreement. The appeal was dismissed, with Longmore and Kitchin LJJ concurring.
Judgment
The Chancellor (Sir Terence Etherton) :
Introduction
The issue on this appeal is whether, and if so in what way, the stay provisions in section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (“the 1996 Act”) apply to a petition to wind up a company on the ground of its inability to pay its debts where the debt on which the petition is based arises out of contract containing an arbitration agreement.
The appeal is by Salford Estates (No 2) Limited (“Salford Estates”) from the order dated 4 February 2014 of His Honour Judge Nigel Bird, sitting as a High Court judge, by which he ordered that the winding up petition presented by Salford Estates against the respondent, Altomart Limited (“Altomart”), on 3 February 2013 be stayed.
The 1996 Act
The following provisions of the 1996 Act are relevant to this appeal:
“1 General principles.
The provisions of this Part are founded on the following principles, and shall be construed accordingly—
(a) the object of arbitration is to obtain the fair resolution of disputes by an impartial tribunal without unnecessary delay or expense;
(b) the parties should be free to agree how their disputes are resolved, subject only to such safeguards as are necessary in the public interest;
(c) in matters governed by this Part the court should not intervene except as provided by this Part.”
“9 Stay of legal proceedings.
(1) A party to an arbitration agreement against whom legal proceedings are brought (whether by way of claim or counterclaim) in respect of a matter which under the agreement is to be referred to arbitration may (upon notice to the other parties to the proceedings) apply to the court in which the proceedings have been brought to stay the proceedings so far as they concern that matter.
(2) …
(3) …
(4) On an application under this section the court shall grant a stay unless satisfied that the arbitration agreement is null and void, inoperative, or incapable of being performed.”
“82 Minor definitions.
(1) In this Part—
…
“dispute” includes any difference;
…
“legal proceedings” means civil proceedings in the High Court or a county court; …”
The background
The background facts can be shortly stated.
Salford Estates and Altomart are the current lessor and lessee respectively under an underlease dated 29 April 1974 for a term of 125 years from 29 September 1971 (“the Lease”). The Lease is of commercial premises at 53-55 Fitzgerald Way, Salford, M6 5JA (“the Premises”). They form part of the Salford shopping centr