header-logo header-logo

Arbitration challenge: Pt 1

26 September 2014 / Nicole Finlayson , Richard Marshall
Issue: 7623 / Categories: Features , Profession , Arbitration
printer mail-detail

In the first of a series of articles, Richard Marshall & Nicole Finlayson examine the various routes open to parties to challenge an award

Why choose arbitration over litigation or other forms of ADR? For many parties it is the confidentiality, commerciality and finality of arbitration that appeal. However, the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) does contain various means by which a dissatisfied party can challenge an award. While it is fair to say that the courts will be slow to interfere with an arbitral award, case law suggests that this does not stop parties from applying and, in some cases, succeeding.

In this series of articles we will examine the various routes open to parties to challenge an award, and consider the practical difficulties that such challenges may face in the light of recent case law. This first article will focus on s 67, which allows an arbitration award to be challenged in the courts on the grounds that the arbitral tribunal lacked substantive jurisdiction.

Challenging jurisdiction

Section 67

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll