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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll