AA 1996—challenging the award—serious irregularity—award obtained by fraud or contrary to public policy (s 68)
AA 1996—challenging the award—serious irregularity—award obtained by fraud or contrary to public policy (s 68)

The following Arbitration guidance note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • AA 1996—challenging the award—serious irregularity—award obtained by fraud or contrary to public policy (s 68)
  • Grounds of serious irregularity—obtained by fraud or contrary to public policy
  • Fraud in obtaining the award—causation
  • When will the court find fraud or contravention of public policy?
  • Who needs to have committed the fraud?
  • Should the court undertake an inquiry into the tribunal’s findings?

This Practice Note deals with serious irregularity challenges where an arbitral award is obtained by fraud or the award or the way in which it was procured is contrary to public policy in England and Wales pursuant to section 68(2)(g) of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996). This Practice Note should, where relevant, be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: AA 1996—challenging the award on grounds of serious irregularity (s 68) and AA 1996—challenging the award—categories of serious irregularity (s 68).

Grounds of serious irregularity—obtained by fraud or contrary to public policy

There are nine exhaustive categories of serious irregularity under AA 1996, s 68 pursuant to which a party may challenge an arbitral award. AA 1996, s 68(2)(g) provides that serious irregularity may occur where:

  1. the award is obtained by fraud, or

  2. the award or the way in which it was procured is contrary to public policy

The approach of the English court to AA 1996, s 68(2)(g), as with all grounds of alleged serious irregularity, suggests that a very strong application will be required for the court to exercise its powers under AA 1996, s 68(3). AA 1996, s 68 is:

'...not a ground for intervention that the court considers that it might have done things differently or expressed its conclusions on the essential issues at greater length. Furthermore