Mahadev Shankar JCA:

Our decision to dismiss this appeal was unanimous. Its subject matter is of some importance to the independence and inviolability of arbitrations conducted in the Regional Centre for Arbitration at Kuala Lumpur (the Centre) under the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Arbitration Rules 1976 and the Rules of the Centre (the Rules).

In the court below Sarawak Shell Berhad (Shell) sought to stymie the arbitration proceedings commenced by the respondents by contending quite simply that s. 34(1) of the Arbitration Act 1952 (the Act) did not deprive the High Court of its power to make orders under s. 25(2) of the Act . Shell asserted that since the respondents had accused it of fraud the trial judge was obliged to exercise his powers aforesaid. In rejecting this claim the trial judge held that s. 34(1) of the Act made any reference to s. 25(2) of the Act impermissible.

Before us Mr. Cecil Abraham of counsel for Shell sought to dilute the effect of s. 34(1) of the Act by submitting that it could only apply to "any arbitration held" under the Rules. In the present case he asserted that the arbitration had not quite got off the ground and co