MAURITIUS Law and Practice Contributed by: André Robert, Ammar Oozeer and Deephallee Harnaran, BLC Robert & Associates
• the applicable law was that of the MARC; • the applicable rules were the Rules of Arbitration of the International Court of the International Cham - ber of Commerce (the “ICC Rules”); and • the arbitrators were to be appointed in accordance with the ICC Rules. The issue to be determined was whether the MARC or the ICC had jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute. Flashbird contended that the arbitration clause was a “hybrid arbitration” that allowed the arbitrator to follow the ICC Rules and not the MARC Rules, which was agreed by the parties. The Privy Council held that, for an award to be set aside on this ground, the applicant must show “a material breach of the arbitration agree - ment that was not an inconsequential irregularity”. It was held that Flashbird suffered no substantial preju - dice from the alleged breach of the ICC Rules and that, in any event, minor and technical errors will not necessarily lead to an award being set aside. Breach of Natural Justice and Mandate Compagnie de Sécurité Privée et Industrielle v Flashbird Limited 2025 SCJ 471 Compagnie de Sécurité Privée moved to set aside an ICC arbitral award on the grounds that, inter alia, the arbitral tribunal had exceeded its mandate, thereby depriving it of a fair hearing. The respondent, Flash - bird Limited, had submitted its claim to the ICC based on the first contract between the parties. The arbi - tral tribunal, however, awarded damages based on a second contract that was entered into between the parties, which had already been determined and/or subject to a previous award delivered by the MARC. The ICC award was set aside and the Supreme Court held, inter alia, that the arbitral tribunal had breached the right to a fair hearing by deciding on a contractual basis not raised by either party, thereby depriving the applicant of an opportunity to present its case, and should that breach not have occurred, the outcome of the ICC award would have been different. 13. Miscellaneous 13.1 Class Action or Group Arbitration There is no procedure in Mauritius that provides for class action arbitration or group arbitration. However,
different persons may jointly enter a case based on a common cause of action. Alternatively, those parties may enter separate cases and retain their respective attorneys and counsel to appear for them. When the respective cases are in shape for hearing, the court may allow them to be consolidated and heard togeth - er, in accordance with paragraph 3 of the First Sched - ule to the IAA. 13.2 Ethical Codes There are no specific codes of ethics and/or codes of conduct applicable to arbitrators, but the respec - tive Mauritian Codes of Ethics for Barristers-at-Law and Attorneys-at-Law are applicable. The Law Prac - titioners (Disciplinary Proceedings) Act 2025 sets out a disciplinary framework in relation to professional misconduct of barristers, attorneys and notaries. 13.3 Third-Party Funding Mauritius laws on arbitration do not provide for any rules or restrictions on third-party funders. To the extent that there is no legislation prohibiting third- party funding, it may be considered to be permitted in Mauritius. Although not commonly used in Mauritius, third-party funding is increasingly being considered, especially by parties to complex arbitration matters and enforce - ment proceedings before the Supreme Court of Mau - ritius where the value of the claim involved is signifi - cant. In those cases, litigants have recourse to funders established internationally. To date, however, there is no public information available on cases in which par - ties have resorted to third-party litigation funding. In OGD Services Holdings Ltd v Norscot Rig Man- agement Pvt Limited ( Mauritius )2023 SCJ 455, the Supreme Court held that a costs award in an English- seated arbitration allowing the successful party to recover third-party litigation costs did not contravene
Mauritius public policy. 13.4 Consolidation
An arbitral tribunal seated in Mauritius and a court can consolidate separate arbitral proceedings if all parties agree. Under the IAA, parties can expressly opt for the Supplementary Provisions set out in Schedule 1 of the IAA to be applied to their arbitration. If they have
619 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook