header-logo header-logo

27 September 2013 / Rian Matthews , Tom Cameron
Issue: 7577 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Balancing Act(s)

istock_000016932494medium

Despite recent Supreme Court consideration, the relationship between the Arbitration Act & the Senior Courts Act remains unclear, say Rian Matthews & Tom Cameron

The Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) is the primary source of English law on arbitration. A key principle underlying the Act is the goal of increasing the autonomy of the arbitral process and limiting court intervention (s 1(c)). To support arbitration, however, AA 1996 gives the English courts significant powers to grant interim orders to preserve assets and evidence (under s 44). Yet the exercise of these powers is subject to strict limitations, so that control of the arbitral process rests with the appointed tribunal.

But there is a tension between the limitations on the courts’ powers under s 44 of AA 1996 and the courts’ wide and general discretion under s 37 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981) to grant injunctions or appoint a receiver where it is “just and convenient to do so”. In 2005, the Court of Appeal remarked that the relationship between the

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

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

Sidley—Jeremy Trinder

Sidley—Jeremy Trinder

Global finance group strengthened by returning partner in London

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll