header-logo header-logo

08 March 2012 / Clare Arthurs , Margaret Tofalides
Issue: 7504 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Arbitration
printer mail-detail

The right challenge

In the first of three articles Margaret Tofalides & Clare Arthurs discuss arbitration challenges

One of the great advantages to arbitration as a form of dispute resolution is that arbitration agreements and arbitration rules usually provide that an arbitration award is final. Following criticism of the overly interventionalist approach of the UK courts, that is the premise on which the Arbitration Act 1996 was drafted (AA 1996). This is borne out in the general principles contained in s 1, which expressly prohibit the court from intervening, except as provided by Pt 1 of AA 1996.

However, AA 1996 sets out three ways in which parties can challenge an arbitration award in the UK courts:

  • s 67 challenge to the tribunal’s substantive jurisdiction;
  • s 68 challenge on the grounds of serious irregularity; and
  • s 69 appeal on a point of law.

This article focuses on s 67 and will also consider the other routes by which a tribunal’s jurisdiction can be challenged. The other grounds for challenge will be considered in

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll