Do English courts have too much power in arbitration proceedings? asks Khawar Qureshi QC
Since the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) came into force more than 10 years ago, the English courts are generally viewed by practitioners and users alike as having adopted a strong supportive, and non-interventionist approach to the arbitral process.
While there are some commentators who suggest that the English courts have been too concerned to protectively “ring-fence” the arbitral process (not least with regard to sparsity of appeals on points of law pursuant to AA 1996, s 69), a recent decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of Dallah Estate v The Ministry of Religious Affairs Government of Pakistan [2009] EWCA Civ 755, [2009] All ER (D) 199 (Jul) (Dallah) has provided an opportunity to consider whether other commentators are right to contend that the English courts still retain excessive power to intervene, and thus disrupt the arbitral process.
State-ment of intent
More than 140 states have signed up to and—in theory—are required to give effect to
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=961ae4db_1)
95ca96e3d47f4eff8d147c4f0df17c77.tmb-mov69x69.png?sfvrsn=3db5d86b_1)
