Cases - Arenson v Casson Beckman Rutley & Co
Record details
- Name
- Arenson v Casson Beckman Rutley & Co
- Date
- [1977]
- Citation
- AC 405
- Legislation
- Keywords
- Party walls
- Summary
-
Accountants were appointed to value shares at their fair value. The agreement stated that they would act as experts and not as arbitrators, but that their valuation would be final and binding on the parties. The plaintiff was unhappy with the valuation and sued the accountants for negligence. The issue was whether the accountants were immune, as they were acting in the position of arbitrators. Lord Wheatley set out some indications of circumstances in which a person would be immune:
- there was a dispute between the parties that had been formulated;
- the dispute had been remitted by the parties to the person in question to resolve in such a manner that he was called on to exercise a judicial function;
- where appropriate, the parties had been provided with an opportunity to present evidence and/or submissions in support of their respective claims in the dispute; and
- the parties had agreed to accept the decision of the person in question.
The House of Lords decided that the accountants in this case were not immune, as either arbitrators or quasi-arbitrators.