header-logo header-logo

17 August 2012 / Clare Arthurs , Margaret Tofalides
Issue: 7527 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Arbitration
printer mail-detail

The right challenge (3)

In the final of three articles Margaret Tofalides & Clare Arthurs discuss s 69 arbitration challenges

The third means of challenging an arbitration award lies under s 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996), which provides that, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, one party may appeal to the court “on a question of law arising out of an award made in the proceedings”.

Opting out

Section 69 differs from ss 67 and 68 in that it is not mandatory. This is an issue which needs to be considered right at the outset, when agreeing to submit disputes to arbitration. Some of the most commonly-used arbitration rules expressly exclude the right to challenge on points of law. You should therefore check the relevant rules before agreeing to use them.

Equally, care must be taken with the arbitration agreement. Agreeing to dispense with reasons for the tribunal’s award will constitute a s 69 exclusion agreement (s 69(1)). An exclusion agreement can also be incorporated by reference rather than by being

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