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

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