header-logo header-logo

Reforming the Arbitration Act 1996

27 September 2022
Issue: 7996 / Categories: Legal News , Arbitration , Profession
printer mail-detail
The Law Commission has set out proposals to amend the Arbitration Act 1996 by streamlining cases and increasing protection for arbitrators.

The proposed updates to the Act, 25 years after it was passed, include giving arbitrators powers to summarily dismiss claims, made by parties, that lack legal merit.

The process for challenging the jurisdiction of an arbitrator would be refined, so that challenges in the courts take place by way of an appeal rather than a full rehearing.

Increased protections for arbitrators include strengthened immunity in certain cases such as where the arbitrator resigns or where an arbitral party brings a court claim which impugns the arbitrator, and new provisions to support equality in arbitral appointments.

A provision requiring arbitrators to disclose any conflict of interest would be added so that such disclosure is fully codified in the Act, and the rules on emergency relief would be clarified.

However, the Commission thought the Act was functioning well overall.

Law Commissioner Professor Sarah Green said the Act ‘was a landmark piece of legislation which helped to propel London to its position as the foremost destination for international arbitration today.

‘By making further improvements, we can help the UK to consolidate its status as a global centre for international dispute resolution.’

Nick Storrs, partner at Taylor Wessing, said: ‘Issues such as summary proceedings and emergency relief in arbitration have been in debate now for some time and so ensuring there is a statutory framework which responds to these issues will be very welcome.

‘The potential for summary disposal of claims has long been a topic of debate. If the proposals are adopted it will be interesting to see how they are used in practice. I'm not sure they are necessary or desirable, but equally any mechanism for improving the efficiency of arbitration should be considered.’

I Stephanie Boyce, president of the Law Society, said the Act ‘enabled the growth and standing of our jurisdiction as an international destination for arbitration. However, the world is not standing still.’

Responses to the consultation paper, Review of the Arbitration Act 1996, are due by 15 December. 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kennedys—Samson Spanier

Kennedys—Samson Spanier

Commercial disputes practice bolstered by partner hire

Bird & Bird—Emma Radcliffe

Bird & Bird—Emma Radcliffe

London competition team expands with collective actions specialist hire

Hill Dickinson—Chris Williams

Hill Dickinson—Chris Williams

Commercial dispute resolution team in London welcomes partner

NEWS
Judging is ‘more intellectually demanding than any other role in public life’—and far messier than outsiders imagine. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC reflects on decades spent wrestling with unclear legislation, fragile precedent and human fallibility
The long-predicted death of the billable hour may finally be here—and this time, it’s armed with a scythe. In a sweeping critique of time-based billing, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, argues in this week's NLJ that artificial intelligence has made hourly charging ‘intellectually, commercially and ethically indefensible’
From fake authorities to rent reform, the civil courts have had a busy start to 2026. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold surveys a procedural landscape where guidance, discretion and discipline are all under strain
Fact-finding hearings remain a fault line in private family law. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Rylatt and Robyn Laye of Anthony Gold Solicitors analyse recent appeals exposing the dangers of rushed or fragmented findings
As the Winter Olympics open in Milan and Cortina, legal disputes are once again being resolved almost as fast as the athletes compete. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Ian Blackshaw of Valloni Attorneys examines the Court of Arbitration for Sport’s (CAS's) ad hoc divisions, which can decide cases within 24 hours
back-to-top-scroll