AA 1996—inadequate award—applying for a reasoned award
AA 1996—inadequate award—applying for a reasoned award

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

  • AA 1996—inadequate award—applying for a reasoned award
  • Application to the tribunal for correction
  • Challenging the award for inadequate reasons
  • Court order to the tribunal to provide reasons
  • How to make an application to court
  • When reasons are ordered by the court

Unless the parties agree otherwise or there is an agreed award, the arbitral award will contain reasons for the award. The obligation to provide reasons is no less onerous for an arbitrator than for a judge in court (Compton Beauchamp Estates v Spence).

In ABB AG v Hochtief Airport, the court gave guidance to arbitrators in that 'it must be obvious that the giving of clearly expressed reasons responsive to the issues as they were debated before the arbitrators will reduce the scope for the making of unmeritorious challenges'.

Application to the tribunal for correction

If no reasons are given or they are inadequate, a party may write to the tribunal requesting that the tribunal correct their award under the slip rule (section 57 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996))—see Practice Note: AA 1996—inadequate award—correcting mistakes or errors in an arbitral award (s 57). The slip rule is to enable the tribunal to correct any clerical mistake or error or to remove any ambiguity in the award and does not specifically provide for the provision of reasons. That said, it is often the first port of call when more reasons are required as any available recourse under AA 1996, s 57 must be exercised before a party can make an application to challenge or appeal an award under AA 1996,