The following Arbitration practice note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:
A party to arbitration proceedings may (on notice to the other parties and to the tribunal) apply to the English and Welsh courts challenging an award made in the proceedings on the ground of serious irregularity affecting the tribunal, the proceedings or the award (section 68(1) of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996)). England and English are used in this Practice Note as convenient shorthand.
Serious irregularity is defined as irregularity that falls within one or more of the nine exhaustive categories specified in AA 1996, s 68(2)(a)–(i), which the court considers has caused or will cause substantial injustice to the applicant (AA 1996, s 68(2)).
For information on the grounds upon which the court may find serious irregularity and on making applications under AA 1996, s 68, see Practice Notes: AA 1996—challenging the award on grounds of serious irregularity (s 68) and AA 1996—challenging and appealing arbitral awards in the English court.
In this Practice Note, we consider the nine categories of serious irregularity and provide examples of how they have been interpreted by the English court. As noted in Practice Note: AA 1996—challenging the award on grounds of serious irregularity (s 68), AA 1996, s 68 challenges are rarely successful in practice, partly because of the restrictive wording of the section, but also because of the English court’s reluctance to interfere with arbitration proceedings as
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
The principle of transferred maliceIf a person has a malicious intent towards X and, in carrying out that intent, injures Y, he is guilty of an offence. So, if D shoots at A with intent to kill him but kills B by mistake it is murder; the mistake as to the identity of the victim is irrelevant as D
When is quantum meruit and quantum valebat relevant?Claims in quantum meruit (value of services) and quantum valebat (value of goods) arise in diverse situations ranging from where contractual terms are silent on issues of payment to where there is no contract at all (Serck v Drake & Scull).General
This Practice Note examines:•why negative pledge clauses are used in commercial transactions •the consequences of breaching negative pledge provisions•how negative pledges are viewed in the context of security and quasi-security, and•key considerations when drafting a negative pledge clauseWhere
This Practice Note looks at CE-File electronic working in the courts under CPR PD 51O, in the context of case management. It provides guidance on how to file a document electronically, deal with rejected electronic filings, issue a claim electronically, file electronic bundles (eBundles) for case
0330 161 1234
To view our latest legal guidance content,sign-in to Lexis®PSL or register for a free trial.