header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Arbitration Act 1996: a fine balance

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
29 January 2021 / Khawar Qureshi KC
Issue: 7918 / Categories: Features , In court , ADR , Arbitration
printer mail-detail
37605
Khawar Qureshi QC analyses the key cases from 2020 in relation to the Arbitration Act 1996
  • Stay applications and anti-suit injunctions.
  • Measures available in support of arbitration.
  • Challenge of awards for serious irregularity.
  • Provisions relating to recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards.
  • Arbitrator bias.

Last year there were 93 reported cases referring to provisions of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996). The provisions most frequently invoked concerned stay applications and anti-suit injunctions (s 9), measures available in support of arbitration (s 44), challenge of awards for serious irregularity (s 68), as well as provisions relating to recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards (s 101-103). A highly significant decision was rendered by the Supreme Court in November 2020 concerning arbitrator bias (s 24) which has provoked international debate. The key cases are referred to below.

Section 9

In the case of The Republic of Mozambique v Credit Suisse and others [2020] EWHC 2012 (Comm) (30 July 2020) Mr Justice Waksman provided a very helpful analysis

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Shareholder secrecy sunk
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
NLJ this week: The expanding remit of national security law
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
NLJ this week: Trauma-informed pro bono
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
NLJ this week: When leases last hours
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: EU law trumps sports arbitration
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll