Law Tutors Online that empower your legal journey. London Law Tutor provides world-class online law tutors and legal education consultants. Our expert law tutors and admissions consultants cover the following law courses and law exams: LNAT, LSAT, BCAT, LLB, JD, GDL, LPC, SQE, BTC, BPC, BTT, LLM, BCL, BAR EXAMS (US and Canada), MPhil and PhD in Law. Our Law Blog regularly publishes articles on recent legal developments at the forefront of legal practice and education.
“A court’s only role in an international arbitration is to facilitate the process. It has no business intervening into a private process unless both parties have agreed that it can do so.” Critically discuss.
Court involvement in an international arbitration
is a fact of commercial life. In England and Wales such intervention should
always be confined to the extent specified in Part I of the Arbitration Act
1996. In particular, sections 42-45 provide examples of the court’s power to
interfere with the process. Even though a court might be allowed to intervene,
it can only do so to the degree and under the conditions prescribed therein.
Moreover, the parties can agree to exclude the power of the court under these
provisions altogether, with the exception of section 43 which enables the court
to require the attendance of a witness in order to give oral testimony or to
produce documents or other material evidence. These provisions are intended to
supply the court with tools to facilitate the alternative dispute resolution
mechanism selected by the parties.
Nonetheless, a party to arbitration may challenge
the award issued by the tribunal in a court of law in accordance with sections
67-69 of the Arbitration Act 1996. While section 69, i.e. appeal on point of
law, might be ousted by a contrary agreement of the parties, the other two
provisions are mandatory in application. It is, however, to be borne in mind
that both parties made themselves subject to the substance of the Arbitration
Act 1996 by choosing the law of England and Wales as the curial law of the
arbitration proceeding. Therefore, it cannot be said that such an intervention
of a court would be contrary to the intention of either party.
Unquestionably, the facilitating role of a court
of law in respect of an international arbitration is enshrined into the text of
the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards
1958 (the New York Convention). Pursuant to Article II, III and V of the New
York Convention, court involvement is required as support for the arbitral
process in the form of recognition and enforcement of an award, nothing else.
Nevertheless, under Article V of the convention a court is provided with a substantive
power of intervention. Out of the seven grounds for refusal of recognition and
enforcement, two can be raised by the court ex officio, the other five being
valid for consideration only if brought up by a party to the arbitration.
First, recognition and enforcement may be refused if a court believes the
subject matter of the dispute in question not to be arbitrable. Secondly, no
recognition or enforcement is possible if such would constitute a breach of
public policy. Consequently, a court might intervene in the process despite no
agreement of the parties to such effect.