Page:Halsbury Laws of England v1 1907.pdf/684

 —

.

Arbitration.

462

be issued to compel the attendance of a witness who may be in some other part of the United Kingdom, and may also order that a writ Arbitration. of habeas corpus ad testificandum be issued to bring up a prisoner for examination before an arbitrator (p). Evidence. Where the submission is contained in a written agreement and does not express a contrary intention, the arbitrator or umpire may require the parties to produce before him all books and documents in their possession or power which relate to the matters in question in the reference (g), and may examine the parties and their witnesses on oath or affirmation (r). If the submission requires that the evidence should be taken on oath or affirmation (s), the arbitrator or umpire has no option but and even where the submission is silent as to whether so to take it the evidence shall be given on oath, since it is the ordinary practice that it should be so given, the arbitrator or umpire should not take it otherwise than on oath unless with the consent of the parties (t). Any person who wilfully and corruptly gives false evidence before an arbitrator is guilty of perjury as if the evidence had been given in open Court, and may be prosecuted and punished accordingly (^^) Sect.

7.

Conduct of



Party protesting that arbitrator is exceeding his authority.

973. A party who protests that the arbitrator is acting either without authority or beyond the scope of the submission, but nevertheless attends the reference, does not thereby waive his protest

Time for making Award and Mode of enlarging Time. 974. The time within which the award is to be made may be

Sect. Time for making award.

Where award made by arbitrators.

{iv).

8.

prescribed by the submission itself, but this is not usually the case. Where the submission is contained in a written agreement and does not prescribe the time within which the award is to be made, the following rules are applicable unless a contrary intention is expressed in the submission. The arbitrator (x) or arbitrators, as the case may be, must make the award within three (y) calendar (z) months after entering

& 53 Vict. c. 49), s. 18 but the Court cannot (jj) Arbitration Act, 1889 (52 order a commission to issue for the examination of witnesses who are outside the United Kingdom {Re Shaw and Ronaldson, [1892] 1 Q. B. 91). 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 49), s. 2, Schedule I. (f) Penrice v. iq) Arbitration Act, Williams (1883), 23 Ch. D. 353. (r) Arbitration Act, 1889, s. 7 (a) and s. 2, Schedule I. (f) and (g). Gale, s) Smith V. Goff (1845), 14 M. & W. 264, 266; Banks v. Baiiks (1835), 1 46 and see Eidoat v. Pye (1797), 1 Bos. & P. 91. Biygs v. Hansell (1855), Wakefield v. Llanelly etc. Co. (1864), 34 Beav. 245 {t)







16 C. B. 562. iu) Arbitration Act, 1889 (52

&

53 Vict. 0. 49), s. 22. 6 Q. B. D. 63, per Lord Selboene, at p. 65. 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 49), s. 2, Schedule I. (c), which (cc) Arbitration Act, but the clause no provides that " the arbitrators" shall make their award etc. doubt applies also where the reference is to a single arbitrator. See the Inter[w]

HamJyn

v. Betteley (1880),



pretation Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 63), s. 1 (1) (b). the period {ij) In calculating the period of three months the day from which begins to run should, it seems, be excluded {Re Higham and Jessop (1840), Kerr v. Jeston (1842), 1 Dowl. (n. s.) 538. And compare Knox v. 9 Dowl. 203 Simmonds (1791), 3 Bro. C. C. 358, andPvgh v. Duke of Leeds (1777), 2 Cowp. 714,.



at p. 723). (z)

See Interpretation Act, 1889 (52

„

&

53 Vict.

c.

63),

s.

3



but apart from that