 The question was whether the innocent party's conduct did convey, unequivocally, that he was treating the contract as repudiated.A failure could be unequivocal.Because Norelf was the respondent, in a defensive position, the Court of Appeal had been wrong to say that Norelf required to seek a certificate under the Arbitration Act 1979, s.1(7) before being allowed to argue that the award was sustainable on alternative grounds.