Arbitration

Case law drew a distinction between protesting that an arbitration tribunal had no jurisdiction, asserting that the issue should be decided by some other court or tribunal, and asking the tribunal to consider the issue of jurisdiction. In the latter case, the party was likely to be held to have invoked the jurisdiction of the tribunal. Moreover, the court had the power to direct that there be a determination of disputed issues of fact under s 66 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and there was no necessity for that to be done by way of action on the award.

In cases of complexity it would still be appropriate for the proceedings to continue as if it were an action, however, in relatively straightforward cases of fact such as were commonly determined on an application under s 67 of the Act. It was appropriate for the issues to be dealt with under s 66 and for appropriate directions to be given under CPR