Birleşik Krallık Hukuk Komisyonu’nun 1996 tarihli İngiliz Tahkim Kanunu’na Reform Önerilerinin Eleştirel Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2024, Volume: 44 Issue: 1, 197 - 219, 21.08.2024

Dogan Gultutan

Abstract

The UK Law Commission’s Reforms Proposed to the English Arbitration Act 1996: Bonum, Malum Et Turpe

Abstract

The 1996 Act has completed its quarter-century cycle of existence. At the time of its enactment, it was praised by scholars and practitioners as a “masterful… comprehensive” piece of legislation and one that was destined to “enhance the attractiveness of England as an arbitral forum”. These predictions proved exceedingly accurate. However, over time the legislation’s various shortcomings began to surface. Its review by the Law Commission was, therefore, very timely. This paper considers the present state of English arbitration law considering the provisions of the 1996 Act and substantive and/or noteworthy recommendations proposed to the legislation, alongside the relevant case-law, and considers the appropriateness and potential utility of these recommendations. In particular, this article considers the following issues: the governing law of an arbitration agreement, the arbitrators’ duty of disclosure, their immunity from liability, the summary disposal of claims and defences, the confidentiality of arbitration and court powers in support of arbitral proceedings and emergency arbitrations. The paper concludes that although the reform proposals are mostly commendable and sufficient to satisfy users’ concerns and expectations, not all are agreeable. Reform proposals do not go far enough. Most notably, the rule concerning the arbitrators’ duty of disclosure should recognise that, in appropriate instances, the subjective expectations of the parties should be addressed in the assessment. The parties’ reasonable and/or legitimate expectations should not be ignored when deciding what facts and circumstances to disclose to ensure that the parties retain confidence in the process and remain the ultimate arbiters of their dispute.

Keywords

Arbitration, Reform, Confidentiality, Disclosure, Governing Law, Seat of Arbitration, Immunity, Summary Disposal, Emergency Arbitration

Ethical Statement

Cikar catismasi vb olmadigini beyan ederim.

Supporting Institution

Bulunmamaktadir.

Thanks

Bulunmamaktadir.

References

• Arbitration Act 1996 (c 23). Full title: An Act to restate and improve the law relating to arbitration pursuant to an arbitration agreement; to make other provision relating to arbitration and arbitration awards; and for connected purposes, passed on 17 June 1996 (Chapter 23). google scholar
• Civil Procedure Act 1997 (c 12). Full title: An Act to amend the law about civil procedure in England and Wales; and for connected purposes, passed on 27 February 1997 (Chapter 12). google scholar
• Africa Sourcing Cameroun Limited and another v Societe par Actions Simplifiee (Rockwinds) and another [2023] EWHC 150 (Comm). google scholar
• Ali Shipping Corporation v Shipyard Trogir [1999] 1 W.L.R. 314. google scholar
• C Ltd v D [2020] EWHC 1283 (Comm). google scholar
• David Sterling v Miriam Rand [2019] EWHC 2560 (Ch). google scholar
• Economic Department of City ofMoscow v Bankers Trust Co [2005] Q.B. 207. google scholar
• Emmott v Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd [2005] Q.B. 207. google scholar
• Emmott v Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd [2008] C.P. Rep. 26. google scholar
• Enka Insaat ve Sanayi AS v OOO Insurance Company Chubb [2020] UKSC 38. google scholar
• Halliburton Company v (1) Chubb Bermuda Insurance Limited, (2) M, (3) N, (4) P [2018] EWCA Civ 817. google scholar
• Halliburton Co v Chubb Bermuda Insurance Ltd [2020] UKSC 48. google scholar
• Haven Insurance Co Ltd v EUI Ltd (t/a Elephant Insurance) [2018] EWCA Civ 2494. google scholar
• Kabab-Ji SAL (Lebanon) v Kout Food Group (Kuwait) [2020] EWCA Civ 6. google scholar
• Kabab-Ji SAL (Lebanon) v Kout Food Group (Kuwait) [2021] UKSC 48. google scholar
• Radisson Hotels APS Denmark v Hayat Otel Işletmeciliği Turizm Yatırım ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi [2023] EWHC 892 (Comm). google scholar
• Russell v Russell (1880) 14 Ch. D. 471. google scholar
• Symbion Power LLC v Venco Imtiaz Construction Co [2017] EWHC 348 (TCC). google scholar
• Union ofIndia v Reliance Industries Limited [2022] EWHC 1407 (Comm). google scholar
• Wicketts v Brine Builders & Siederer [2001] App.L.R. 06/08. google scholar
• Betancourt JC, ‘Chapter 19: The Reform of the Arbitration Act 1996’, in Gregory Roy Fullelove, Laila Hamzi, et al. (eds), International Arbitration in England: Perspectives in Times of Change (Kluwer Law International 2022), 361 - 388. google scholar
• Born G, International Arbitration: Law and Practice, Third Edition (Kluwer Law International 2021). google scholar
• Eastwood G, ‘A Real Danger of Confusion? The English Law Relating to Bias in Arbitrators’, in William W. Park (ed), Arbitration International (2001) 17(3) 287-312. google scholar
• Hacking D, ‘Arbitration is Only as Good as Its Arbitrators’, in Stefan Kröll, Loukas A. Mistelis, Perales Viscasillas Maria del Pilar & Vikki M. Rogers (eds), Liber Amicorum Eric Bergsten - International Arbitration and International Commercial Law: Synergy, Convergence and Evolution (Kluwer Law International 2011), 223-230. google scholar
• Langford M, Creamer CD and Behn D, ‘Regime Responsiveness in International Economic Disputes’ in Szilard Gaspar-Szilagyi, Daniel Behn and Malcom Langford (eds), Adjudicating Trade and Investment Disputes: Convergence or Divergence? (Cambridge University Press 2020), 245. google scholar
• Rokison KS, ‘Chapter 12: ‘Pastures New’ (Review of Arbitration Act 1996)’, in Julian D.M. Lew and Loukas A. Mistelis (eds), Arbitration Insights: Twenty Years of the Annual Lecture of the School of International Arbitration, Sponsored by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, International Arbitration Law Library, Volume 16 (Kluwer Law International 2007), 213 - 222. google scholar
• Sheppard AW, ‘English Arbitration Act (Chapter 23)’, in Loukas A. Mistelis (ed), Concise International Arbitration (Second Edition), (Kluwer Law International 2015), 977 - 980. google scholar
• Yeşilırmak A, ‘Transparency and Stakeholders’ Role in the Selection of the Arbitral Tribunal’, in Stavros Brekoulakis, Romesh Weeramantry, Lilit Nagapetyan (Eds), Achieving the Arbitration Dream: Liber Amicorum for Professor Julian D.M. Lew KC (Kluwer Law International, 2023), 285-293. google scholar
• Ajibo KI, ‘Confidentiality in International Commercial Arbitration: Assumptions of Implied Duty and a Proposed Solution’ (2015) 3(2) Latin American Journal of International Trade Law 337. google scholar
• Bagner H, ‘Confidentiality—A Fundamental Principle in International Commercial Arbitration?’ (2001) 18(2) Journal of International Arbitration 243. google scholar
• Beale N et al., ‘Removing an Arbitrator: Recent Decisions of the English Court on Apparent Bias in International Arbitration’, 2016 (34(2) ASA Bulletin, (Association Suisse de l’Arbitrage), 322-341. google scholar
• Carbonneau TE, ‘A Comment on the 1996 United Kingdom Arbitration Act’ (1998) 22 Tulane Maritime Law Journal 131. google scholar
• Chenu V, ‘The Arbitration Act 1996: One Year On: The New Provisions Under the Microscope and Recent Cases’ (1998) 6(5) International Insurance Law Review 165. google scholar
• Collins D, ‘The Line of Equilibrium: Improving the Legitimacy of Investment Treaty Arbitration Through the Application of the WTO’s General Exceptions’ (2016) 32(4) Arbitration International 575. google scholar
• Darian-Smith M and Ghosh V, ‘The Fruit of the Arbitration Tree: Confidentiality in International Arbitration’ (2015) 81(4) The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management 360. google scholar
• Davidson FP, ‘The new Arbitration Act - a Model Law?’ (1997) Journal of Business Law 101-129. google scholar
• Dharmananda K and Ryan D, ‘Summary Disposal in Arbitration: Still Fair or Agreed to be Fair’ (2018) 35(1) Journal of International Arbitration 31. google scholar
• Eken C and Yalcin T, ‘An overview of the English Arbitration Reform Act and Its Implications in Practice’ (2024) 45(4) The Company Lawyer 126. google scholar
• Fortier LY, ‘The Occasionally Unwarranted Assumption of Confidentiality’ (1999) 15(2) Arbitration International 131-140. google scholar
• Gicquello M, ‘Reviewing the Arbitration Act 1996: A Difficult Exercise?’ (2023) 2(4) Amicus Curiae, Series 2 391. google scholar
• Gültutan D, “Appear as You Are or Be As You Appear”: Sound Advice to Arbitrators Considering Independence and Impartiality Disclosures? A Comparative Analysis Advocating for Uniformity and Addressing Participants’ Legitimate Expectations’ (2024) 3 International Trade Law & Regulation 133. google scholar
• Gültutan D, ‘Confidentiality of Arbitrations Under English Law: Sufficiently Sacrosanct to Warrant Legislative Shielding? A Critical Analysis from a Rumian Perspective’ (2023) 1 International Trade Law & Regulation 5. google scholar
• Kazimi L, ‘The Walking Dead: Double Life of the Kabab-Ji Award’ (Kluwer Arbitration Blog, 16 November 2022). google scholar
• Kumar S and Singh RP, ‘Transparency and Confidentiality in International Commercial Arbitration’ (2020) 86(4) The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management 463481. google scholar
• Nga DC and Adeleye PO, ‘The English Supreme Court’s Decision in Halliburton v. Chubb: An Examination of the Issues Arising from Arbitrators’ Acceptance of Multiple Appointments in Related Arbitrations and Arbitrator’s Duty to Disclose’ (2022) 88(1) Arbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management, 201-218. google scholar
• Scherer M and Jensen O, ‘Towards a Harmonized Theory of the Law Governing the Arbitration Agreement’ (2021) 10(4) Indian Journal of Arbitration Law 1. google scholar
• Teomete Yalabik F, ‘The Impact of the Seat of Arbitration on Judicial-Interference: Do Sections 67, 68 and 69 of the English Arbitration Act 1996 Regarding Challenges of Awards Make London an Attractive Hub?’ (2021) 70 Annales de la Faculte de Droit d’Istanbul 253-272. google scholar
• Webster TH, ‘Efficiency in Investment Arbitration: Recent Decisions on Preliminary and Costs Issues’ (2009) 25(4) Arbitration International 469. google scholar
• Business and Property Courts, The Commercial Court Report 2022-2023 (Including the Admiralty Court Report), February 2024. google scholar
• Fanou M, ‘Adapting Arbitration to a Changing World’, Joint Survey by the School of International Arbitration (SIA) of the Queen Mary University of London and White & Case LLP (2021). google scholar
• Friedland P and Mistelis L, ‘2010 International Arbitration Survey: Choices in International Arbitration’ School of International Arbitration (SIA) of the Queen Mary University of London and White & Case LLP (2010). google scholar
• IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration (2024). google scholar
• Law Commissions Act 1965 (c 22). Full title: An Act to provide for the constitution of Commissions for the reform of the law, passed on 15 June 1965 (Chapter 22). google scholar
• Law Commission’s “Review of the Arbitration Act 1996: Final report and Bill” (Law Com No 413) dated 6 September 2023. google scholar
• UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of 1985 (as amended in 2006). google scholar