header-logo header-logo

Arbitration reforms announced

06 September 2023
Issue: 8039 / Categories: Legal News , Arbitration , ADR
printer mail-detail
The Law Commission has recommended a series of reforms to the Arbitration Act 1996, including extending immunity so that arbitrators are protected from liability when they resign or are removed.

The commission, which published its final recommendations and draft legislation this week following an 18-month review, said strengthened immunity would support the arbitrator to make robust and impartial decisions without the fear of being sued.

Other recommendations include codifying the law on arbitrators’ duty to disclose conflicts of interest while retaining current duties on impartiality. The commission suggested arbitrators be able to summarily dismiss legal claims that lack merit. It recommended clarifying the power of the courts to support arbitration proceedings and emergency arbitrators, as well as improvements to the framework for challenging jurisdiction.

In terms of disputes between parties over the governing law that should apply, the commission recommended a default rule in favour of the law of the seat. The commission said this would ‘have the virtues of simplicity and certainty’ and ‘would see more arbitration agreements governed by the law of England and Wales, when those arbitrations are also seated here’.

Overall, however, the commission concluded the central tenets of the Act continue to function well. It considered whether to introduce provisions on confidentiality, but decided there was no need for reform as the law is working well.

Law commissioner Professor Sarah Green said: ‘With these improvements, we hope that the Act provides a modern and effective legislative framework for many years to come, enabling arbitration to continue playing a significant role in the UK economy.’

Nick Vineall KC, chair of the Bar Council, expressed support for the proposals and welcomed the commission’s ‘characteristically careful and balanced review’.

Vineall said: ‘It is extremely important that the government finds parliamentary time for the short Bill which the Law Commission proposes.

‘London has a well-deserved reputation as the foremost centre for international arbitration. It is important to legislate to make the modest changes to the arbitration regime which the Law Commission has recommended in order to maintain and enhance that reputation.’

Justice minister Lord Bellamy said the government would respond shortly to the recommendations.

Issue: 8039 / Categories: Legal News , Arbitration , ADR
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll