Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 12 JUNE 2013

Serious Irregularity In Arbitration

"Atkins Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport", a recent TCC case, gave guidance on the grounds for a "serious irregularity" challenge under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996.

United KingdomReal Estate and Construction

Atkins Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport, a recent TCC case, gave guidance on the grounds for a "serious irregularity" challenge under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996. Section 68 is similar to Rule 68 of the Scottish Arbitration Rules so the case is also of interest in Scotland, particularly given Lord Glennie's statement in Arbitration Application No.3 of 2011 that in relation to questions of interpretation and approach, English authorities are relevant and "there is no point in re-inventing the (arbitration) wheel".

The Facts

Atkins was appointed by the Secretary of State as managing agent and contractor for maintenance, repair of minor defects and management of major schemes for part of the highways network. The contract was an amended version of NEC3. A dispute arose in relation to the payment mechanism for repairing potholes. This went to adjudication and then to arbitration.

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