header-logo header-logo

Balancing Act(s)

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll