Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 15 JULY 1997

Challenging An International Arbitration Award Under The Arbitration Act 1996. What Has Changed?

Norton Rose Fulbright
Norton Rose Fulbright
Contributor
Norton Rose Fulbright

Norton Rose Fulbright

Norton Rose Fulbright is a global law firm providing the world’s preeminent corporations and...

View firm profile
Explore more from Norton Rose Fulbright

United KingdomLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
(First published in In House Lawyer, June 1997)

What has changed?

One of the prime objectives of the new Arbitration Act was to reduce the extent to which courts might become involved in an arbitral procedure. Prior to the introduction of the Act, English courts had been viewed abroad as too 'interventionist'. A concern often encountered was that London stood to lose out in the increasing competition between arbitration venues around the world because parties could not rely on English courts not to interfere in a private dispute resolution process. International parties, it was feared, might prefer to conduct their arbitration in places where the courts were less willing to intervene.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from