header-logo header-logo

Arbitration

25 November 2010
Issue: 7443 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Noble Denton Middle East and another v Noble Denton International Ltd [2010] EWHC 2574 (Comm), [2010] All ER (D) 191 (Nov)

It was well established that s 18 of the Act was simply what might be categorised as a gateway. It was the way in which an arbitrator was appointed, and s 17 of the Act applied in different circumstances, but to the same effect. Further, the decision to arbitrate reflected what was often called “the autonomy of the parties” and should only very exceptionally be overriden by the courts. Arbitrators should, and were entitled to, decide not only issues, but also the question of their own jurisdiction. The court would intervene in certain circumstances. 

  • First, it would intervene after an arbitration when an application was made under s 67 of the Act by a losing party, if appropriate.
  • Second, there could be references by the arbitrators in appropriate cases (or by the parties) under s 32 of the Act.
  • Third, a non-party to arbitration, a party which had taken no part in an arbitration and wished to assert
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Leeds office strengthened with triple partner hire

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Corporate lawyer joins as partner in London office

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll