Conducting the arbitration

Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis

STOP PRESS: This Overview is currently Under Review in light of the new Arbitration Act 2025 which came into force on 1 August 2025. For further information see: Arbitration Act 2025 commencement and transitional provisions 

A quick guide to arbitration procedure

There is no set procedure for arbitration akin to that set out in the CPR for litigation. That said, many arbitrations follow a regular format allowing time for formal commencement of the arbitration, appointment of tribunal, preliminary hearing/procedural meetings, exchange of submissions, provision of written and oral evidence, substantive hearing, close of proceedings and provision of an award.

For more information, see Practice Note: A quick guide to the arbitration process.

Arbitration procedure under the AA 1996 in England and Wales

Arbitration under the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996), rather than in accordance with the rules of an arbitral institution or organisation, is an ad-hoc procedure not administered by an institution or body. It is for the tribunal (once appointed) to control the arbitration and, subject to the parties’ agreement, to set and drive the procedure of the

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Arbitration News

Arbitration scope in shareholder agreements (Soremi v China National Gold)

Arbitration analysis: The Hong Kong Court of First Instance refused China National Gold Group Hong Kong Limited (CNG) leave to appeal against the earlier refusal to stay Soremi Investments Ltd’s (SIL) action in favour of arbitration. Although the shareholders’ agreement contained a wide arbitration clause (expressly extending to disputes over ‘non-contractual obligations’), the court held that the dispute must still, in substance, arise out of or relate to that agreement. The proposed appeal failed because the judge had not created a new ‘transacting/non-transacting party’ test: SIL’s limited role under the agreement (mainly to give effect to dividend arrangements) was simply part of the contractual context. Further, the conversion claim did not depend on determining whether the agreement’s reserved-matters provisions were complied with, and the Fiona Trust presumption could not expand the clause beyond what the parties objectively agreed. The decision underlines that Hong Kong’s pro-arbitration policy operates through party autonomy and careful contractual construction, not presumptions that override context. Written by Julien Chaisse, professor & RGC senior research fellow at School of Law, City University of Hong Kong.

Arbitration weekly highlights—15 January 2026

This week's edition of Arbitration weekly highlights includes: arbitration-related decisions from England and Wales and Switzerland, updates from AIAC, DIS, SIAC and VIAC, plus a new LexisNexis Middle East report on global trends in arbitration award challenges. All this and more in our weekly highlights.

England and Wales—functus officio revisited: arbitral correction decisions as evidence in section 68 AA 1996 challenges (Seacrest v BCP)

Arbitration analysis: What is the status of an arbitral tribunal’s decision refusing to correct an award? The court considered this question in the context of an application to set aside an award on grounds of serious irregularity under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996). The claimant, Seacrest Group Ltd (‘Seacrest’), argued that the tribunal had infringed due process in its award in an arbitration between Seacrest and the defendants, BCPR PTE Ltd and Bangchak Corporation Public Company Ltd (together ‘BCP’), by failing to address a submission made by Seacrest for the first time in its written closing—and had then erred again in refusing to correct this aspect of the award. Seacrest argued that the court could not take account of the yribunal’s comments in the correction decision to the effect that, even if it had considered the late submission, this would not have changed the award. The court disagreed. It held that the correction decision, reached under article 38 of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (2021), was admissible evidence on which the court could base a conclusion that Seacrest had not suffered a substantial injustice. The court thus took the correction decision into account in finding that Seacrest’s new point would in any event have been rejected by the tribunal. Written by Natasha Peter, partner at Trinity International and barrister at Cornerstone Barristers.

Remedies against Swiss awards must be sought proactively and swiftly (État A v B & C)

Arbitration analysis: État A v B & C confirms two earlier holdings of the Swiss Federal Tribunal. First, if a party considers that a Swiss arbitral award was improperly notified but nevertheless became aware of the award informally, that party must raise the issue immediately so as to allow rectification of the deficiency; failing to do so, it may not later rely on notification defects . Second, Swiss arbitral awards are null and void only in exceptional circumstances, and only where the set-aside framework does not, in general, provide adequate relief. As a rule, even where a tribunal lacks jurisdiction, its awards remain valid. Written by PD Dr Johannes Landbrecht LLB, Rechtsanwalt and barrister at Walder Wyss, Geneva.

View Arbitration by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

The seat of the arbitration

The seat of the arbitrationThis Practice Note considers the key concept of the seat of an arbitration, with a particular focus on the law of England and Wales and Northern Ireland (England and English are used as shorthand throughout). Practice Note: Choosing the seat of arbitration may also be of

Arbitration agreements—example domestic arbitration clause (England and Wales)

Arbitration agreements—example domestic arbitration clause (England and Wales)Arbitration clauses and agreements provide for disputes to be dealt with by an appointed arbitral tribunal and can arise in both domestic and international contexts. For more information on arbitration agreements, see the

Early dismissal, summary dismissal and strike out in arbitration proceedings

Early dismissal, summary dismissal and strike out in arbitration proceedingsSTOP PRESS: This Practice Note is currently Under Review in light of the new Arbitration Act 2025. For further information on when the new act comes into force see Practice Note: When will the Arbitration Act 2025 come

Ad hoc arbitration—an introduction to the key features of ad hoc arbitration

Ad hoc arbitration—an introduction to the key features of ad hoc arbitrationAn ad hoc arbitration is any arbitration in which the parties have not selected an institution to administer the arbitration. This offers parties flexibility as to the conduct of the arbitration, but less external support
The seat of the arbitration

The seat of the arbitration

The seat of the arbitrationThis Practice Note considers the key concept of the seat of an arbitration, with a particular focus on the law of England and Wales and Northern Ireland (England and English are used as shorthand throughout). Practice Note: Choosing the seat of arbitration may also be of

Arbitration agreements—example domestic arbitration clause (England and Wales)

Arbitration agreements—example domestic arbitration clause (England and Wales)

Arbitration agreements—example domestic arbitration clause (England and Wales)Arbitration clauses and agreements provide for disputes to be dealt with by an appointed arbitral tribunal and can arise in both domestic and international contexts. For more information on arbitration agreements, see the

Early dismissal, summary dismissal and strike out in arbitration proceedings

Early dismissal, summary dismissal and strike out in arbitration proceedings

Early dismissal, summary dismissal and strike out in arbitration proceedingsSTOP PRESS: This Practice Note is currently Under Review in light of the new Arbitration Act 2025. For further information on when the new act comes into force see Practice Note: When will the Arbitration Act 2025 come

Ad hoc arbitration—an introduction to the key features of ad hoc arbitration

Ad hoc arbitration—an introduction to the key features of ad hoc arbitration

Ad hoc arbitration—an introduction to the key features of ad hoc arbitrationAn ad hoc arbitration is any arbitration in which the parties have not selected an institution to administer the arbitration. This offers parties flexibility as to the conduct of the arbitration, but less external support