header-logo header-logo

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

Arbitration challenge: Pt 1

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll