In Goel v Amegal Ltd  EWHC 2454 (TCC), the Claimant applied under s.24 Arbitration Act 1996 for the removal of an arbitrator in respect of a construction dispute. It was alleged that the arbitrator had acted with bias by failing to adjourn meetings which the Claimant had said it could not attend, by refusing to stay the proceedings and by issuing a peremptory order requiring the Claimant to file a proper defence and counterclaim.
The application was refused. In his judgment, Coulson J noted the exceptional nature of the court’s jurisdiction to intervene in arbitration proceedings. The arbitrator had done no more than make appropriate case management decisions in the face of conduct by the Claimant which had amounted to “a deliberate course to create the maximum disruption and difficulty in the arbitration, of which this application [was] simply the most recent manifestation”.