Walkinshaw v. Diniz

[2000] 2 All ER (Comm) 237 (2000)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Walkinshaw v. Diniz

England and Wales High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division
[2000] 2 All ER (Comm) 237 (2000)

Facts

On October 24, 1997, the owners and operators of Arrows Formula One racing team, including Walkinshaw, entered a contract with Diniz (defendant). Diniz agreed to drive for Arrows during the Formula One World Championships, an event governed by the 1997 Concorde Agreement. Arrows agreed to provide Diniz with a car and a spare car. As mandated under the 1997 Concorde Agreement, the contract between Diniz and Arrows contained Clause 11, which required parties to resolve disputes through the Contract Recognition Board (CRB). In November 1997, the contract was registered with the CRB. Diniz and Arrows then had a series of disputes, causing the convening of the CRB. Arrows, through its representative Walkinshaw (plaintiff), also filed litigation in the English courts. Diniz filed a stay to halt proceedings under § 9 of the English Arbitration Act of 1996, arguing that the parties had agreed to refer the matter to arbitration in the contract signed in 1997 and that the matter was pending in arbitration before the CRB. Arrows countered that the agreement signed in 1997 made no reference to arbitration in connection with the CRB. Arrows asserted that the CRB was merely a body to decide the rules of the game and that the arbitration should proceed before the CRB. Arrows also asserted that the CRB did not provide Arrows with an adequate opportunity to present its case or provide evidence as the CRB limited the evidence allowed and the time allotted for arguments.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Thomas, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership