header-logo header-logo

25 October 2007
Issue: 7294 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Arbitration
printer mail-detail

Law lords take tough line on arbitration clauses

News

Arbitration clauses should be presumed to cover any dispute concerning the relationship between the relevant parties, unless the contrary is clear from the wording, the House of Lords has ruled.

The Law Lords’ landmark decision for international arbitration in Premium Nafta v Fili Shipping upholds the decision of the Court of Appeal.
It was also held that under the doctrine of separability, an arbitration agreement must be treated as a distinct agreement and can be void or voidable only on grounds related directly to the arbitration agreement. The arbitration agreement will generally be unaffected by the invalidity of the main contract, whether that invalidity be based on illegality, misrepresentation, fraud or, as alleged in the Premium Nafta case, bribery.

Nicholas Hamblen QC, of 20 Essex Street, who acted for the successful respondent, says the decision will make it more difficult for parties to contend that particular types of disputes are not covered by the arbitration agreement they have made.

He adds: “It will also make it far more difficult

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

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

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