Anthony Stansfeld, the ex-police commissioner who oversaw the investigation into the HBOS Reading fraud, has described Horta-Osório's knighthood as "extraordinary".
Live Shareholder Event Statements The following statements were made at a virtual shareholder event today by the Group s Chair, Robin Budenberg, Interim Group Chief Executive Officer, William Chalmers, and the Chair of the Responsible Business Committee, Sara Weller. Welcome everyone to the Lloyds Banking Group virtual shareholder event which we are holding ahead of our actual AGM next week. I m Robin Budenberg and I ve been Group Chair since January, having joined the Board in October last year. So, this is my first Lloyds Banking Group shareholder event. These are important events, which allow us to engage directly with you, our shareholders, and give you the opportunity to ask us questions. In keeping with the updates we normally provide you at the AGM, today I would like to say a few words about:
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
In a rare successful challenge to an arbitration award under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, the Commercial Court remitted parts of an award for reconsideration by the tribunal.
1 The Court found that a computational error in the award - which had been admitted by the tribunal - amounted to a serious irregularity which caused or would cause substantial injustice to the applicant.
Background
The case arose out of a dispute between two Russian individuals: Mr Bogatikov, owner of Doglemor Trade Limited (
Doglemor ), the ultimate holding company of a Russian logistics and haulage business called the Business Lines Group (collectively referred to in the judgment as the
Application to Tribunal under Article 27(1) of the LCIA Rules
In January 2020, the Doglemor parties made an application to the tribunal under Article 27(1) of the LCIA Rules requesting that the tribunal correct its mistake.
Under Rule 27(1) of the LCIA Rules, a party may request that an arbitral tribunal correct “any error in computation, any clerical or typographical error, any ambiguity or any mistake of a similar nature” in an award.
In its response, the tribunal conceded that it had made such an error and acknowledged that the Agreed Model contained an express instruction in respect of the historic tax liabilities to “enter a negative value” which the tribunal had mistakenly overlooked.