Perenco UK Ltd and another company v Bond

Arbitration – Award. The Technology and Construction Court, in allowing an appeal under s 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996, held that an arbitrator had wrongly found that a deed granting the second appellant's predecessor, British Gas (BG), an easement to run a subsurface pipeline across land owned by the respondent contained an implied term that the owner of the pipeline, BG, was obliged to serve a Mining Code counter-notice if the respondent landowner wished to do works which would interfere with the pipeline. The court held that the implied term was not one which was necessary to give the deed business efficacy or which 'went without saying'. That conclusion was supported by the fact that such an implied term contradicted the express provision in s 78 of the Mining Code.

Category: