header-logo header-logo

The right challenge

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

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

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