header-logo header-logo

29 March 2012 / Clare Arthurs , Margaret Tofalides
Issue: 7507 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Arbitration
printer mail-detail

The right challenge (2)

In the second of three articles Margaret Tofalides & Clare Arthurs discuss s 68 arbitration challenges

 

Section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) allows an arbitration award to be challenged on the ground of serious irregularity affecting the proceedings, tribunal or award. Like s 67, s 68 is mandatory; the parties cannot choose to opt out from it. The legislature intended the courts to be able to intervene in arbitration, even though the parties have chosen to arbitrate rather than litigate. The central issue here is how the courts balance the administration of justice with the principle of party autonomy: how often do s 68 challenges succeed?

Challenging an award

Section 68 challenges are subject to the same restrictions as s 67 challenges: any application must be made (on notice) within 28 days of the date of the award or notification of any arbitral appeal or review’s outcome (s 70(3)). Equally, the party must first exhaust any process of appeal or review under the arbitration
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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll