header-logo header-logo

Arbitration challenge: Pt 3

06 March 2015 / Nicole Finlayson , Clare Arthurs , Richard Marshall
Issue: 7643 / Categories: Features , Profession , Arbitration
printer mail-detail
nlj_7643_marshallfinlaysonarthurs

In their third update, Richard Marshall, Nicole Finlayson & Clare Arthurs discuss how to run a successful s 69 appeal

In this third article considering how parties can challenge awards under the Arbitration Act 1996 (the Act), we look at recent developments relating to s 69. Under s 69, a party to arbitral proceedings may appeal to the court on a point of English law arising out of an award. The question is, will this third way prove any easier to navigate than its statutory brethren? (see “Arbitration challenge: Pt 1”, 164 NLJ 7623 p 25 & “Arbitration challenge: Pt 2", 164 NLJ 7628 p 35)

Appeal on a question of law

Unlike ss 67 and 68, s 69 is not a mandatory provision. It is open to parties to exclude the s 69 right to appeal by providing for this in the arbitration agreement or using a set of rules (eg the ICC rules) which expressly exclude any right of appeal. Parties

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

DWF—19 appointments

DWF—19 appointments

Belfast team bolstered by three senior hires and 16 further appointments

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Firm strengthens leveraged finance team with London partner hire

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Double hire marks launch of family team in Leeds

NEWS
Artificial intelligence may be revolutionising the law, but its misuse could wreck cases and careers, warns Clare Arthurs of Penningtons Manches Cooper in this week's NLJ
Small law firms want to embrace technology but feel lost in a maze of jargon, costs and compliance fears, writes Aisling O’Connell of the Solicitors Regulation Authority in this week's NLJ
The Supreme Court issued a landmark judgment in July that overturned the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, once poster boys of the Libor and Euribor scandal. In NLJ this week, Neil Swift of Peters & Peters considers what the ruling means for financial law enforcement
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve reports on Haynes v Thomson, the first judicial application of the Supreme Court’s For Women Scotland ruling in a discrimination claim, in this week's NLJ
Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre makes the case for ‘General Practice Pro Bono’—using core legal skills to deliver life-changing support, without the need for niche expertise—in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll