header-logo header-logo

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

Arbitration challenge: Pt 3

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

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise expands London secondaries team with addition of Mary Lavelle

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law welcomes ex-Irwin Mitchell team to launch Hestia Private Client

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Heavyweight patent litigator will bolster Carpmaels Ransford’s rapidly growing Litigation team as firm marks its 250th anniversary

NEWS
Lawyers have welcomed plans to create specialist rape and serious sex offences courtrooms at every Crown Court
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
back-to-top-scroll