header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
29 July 2020 / Masood Ahmed
Issue: 7897 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , ADR , Arbitration
printer mail-detail

Route 66: enforcing arbitral awards

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
25164
Masood Ahmed reports on leave to enforce under s 66 of the Arbitration Act 1996

In brief

  • Section 66 of the Arbitration Act 1996: enforcing arbitral awards.
  • West Tankers Inc v Allianz SpA (The Front Comor): enforcing the rights which the award has established.
  • A v B: a helpful reminder of the approach the courts will adopt when considering an application to enforce under s 66.

Section 66 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (the 1996 Act) provides that an arbitral award may, with the permission of the court, be enforced in the same manner as a judgment or order of the court. However, for the award to be validly enforced, it must, as confirmed in West Tankers Inc v Allianz SpA (The Front Comor) [2012] EWCA Civ 27, [2012] All ER (D) 127 (Jan), seek to enforce rights which the award has established (ie, be a declaratory award). Recently, the High Court in A v B [2020] EWHC 952 (Comm) set aside an earlier order

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll