header-logo header-logo

28 March 2013 / James Harrison
Issue: 7554 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Arbitration
printer mail-detail

Assess now or pay later

How do courts deal with the question of costs where an arbitration award is being challenged? James Harrison reports

The usual rule in dispute resolution, whether court-based litigation or arbitration, is that the losing party pays a substantial proportion of the winning party’s legal costs. Arbitrations and arbitration clauses have been enthusiastically embraced because their consensual nature affords parties greater flexibility as to how they manage their costs.

However, even with this advantage of flexibility, the costs of commencing or defending arbitration will be foremost in a party’s mind when considering their options. It is commercially critical to prevent the costs of litigating a dispute from becoming disproportionate to the claim in question. If you add an unscrupulous opponent which has hidden its assets, then a party is faced with a perfect storm with very little prospect of recovering any of its costs. Therefore, a key consideration in any form of dispute resolution is the question of costs and how to manage and obtain security for them throughout a dispute.

This

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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll