City Research Online

Abstract

In arbitral jurisprudence, a sense of competition between the principles of party autonomy and limited intervention by the court always attracts the concentration of different commentators. Previously, the English arbitration practices were immensely criticised for its interventionist attitude into the arbitration proceedings and arbitral awards. Limiting the judicial intervention, as one of the factors, prompted the Government to enact the new Arbitration Act in 1996. This Act enshrines both the competing issues as general principles of arbitration. However, does the Act establish the esteemed balance? A plain reading of the concerned provisions of this Act reveals that there are two restrictions on party autonomy: first, compliance to some mandatory provisions during undertaking an arbitration agreement; and second, necessary safeguards for upholding public interest. Does the Act allow the court to exercise its authority beyond these two restrictions? If yes, then how does this Act strike a fair balance between the principles of party autonomy and limited judicial intervention? This study analyses these issues.

Publication Type:	Article
Additional Information:	Published by The City Law School, City, University of London.
Subjects:	K Law > K Law (General)
Departments:	The City Law School > Academic Programmes
SWORD Depositor:	Symplectic Administrator

Export

Downloads