El Economista Num 87 Iuris & Lex Buen Gobierno y RSC, marzo 2025. Nuevos rumbos en Arbitraje desde Londres: Actualización de la Ley de Arbitraje.
https://www.eleconomista.es/opinion/noticias/13280519/03/25/nuevos-rumbos-en-el-arbitraje-desde-londres.htmlProf. Nazareth Romero, FCIArb
Arbitration Partner at Ovoli Frugoni Romero | Arbitration Litigation
Chair Iberian Chapter European Branch Chartered Institute of Arbitrators CIArb
On latest February 24th, 2025 the amendment to the Arbitration Act 1996 of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland was completed with Royal assent, having been passed in both the House of Lords and the House of Commons. It is expected to enter into force shortly, on a date to be determined by the Secretary of State. Scotland is governed by the Arbitration Act 2010.
From our Chartered Institute of Arbitrators CIArb, Cristen Bauer, Head of Policy stated:
“As the world’s leading professional body for dispute resolvers, we are delighted to see the Arbitration Act granted Royal Assent. We worked closely with the UK Law Commission and other officials during the review of the Arbitration Act 1996, and we are pleased that most of our recommendations were included in the final report and that all of the review’s recommendations were adopted.”
Indeed, CIArb was consulted in the drafting of this important reform to the 1996 Arbitration Act, and thus today we can affirm its leading forward-thinking approach to improving dispute resolution. I would like to draw attention to several improvements that will give us reflect, specifically mentioning: (-) In a contract that provides, for the resolution of disputes, the law applicable to the arbitration clause (Arbitration Agreement), in the absence of a specific agreement between the parties, this law is the law of the seat of the arbitration. This law is applicable to commercial arbitration, not to arbitration regulated by investment treaties; (-) On the duty of disclosure of arbitrators, when considering the acceptance of an arbitration procedure: there is a new duty of disclosure for arbitrators, which requires them to disclose to the parties any circumstances that could reasonably give rise to justifiable doubts as to their impartiality, although this is combined with the extension of the immunity of arbitrators from liability for resignations and the costs of applying to ordinary jurisdictional courts for their removal, in order to assist arbitrators in making impartial decisions; (-) Power to issue summary awards, i.e. if the arbitral tribunal considers that the claimant or the respondent has no real prospects of success in relation to the claim or matter submitted to arbitration, this tribunal has the power to issue a summary award on that claim or matter; (-) Emergency Arbitration expands its powers, specifying that an emergency arbitrator may issue an interim order if his or her instructions are not followed, and that such an interim order may be enforced by application to the ordinary court, i.e., strengthening the support of ordinary courts for the arbitral function by supporting the actions of emergency arbitrators to enhance their effectiveness; (-) Simplifying judicial procedures related to arbitration to increase clarity and reduce delays and costs for the parties; (-) Strengthening the support of ordinary courts for arbitral jurisdictional procedure in matters involving third parties not party to the arbitration, i.e., preserving evidence, granting interim and other provisional measures to be effective when a “necessary respondent” is not a party to the arbitration.
In short: The ability of arbitrators to issue a summary award is enhanced. This represents direct cost savings in terms of time and management of the arbitration procedure. It also empowers the parties, when drafting contracts, to carefully observe the law applicable to the seat of the contract and the law applicable to the dispute resolution clause. All of this represents an improvement in the regulations of Arbitral Institutions in line with the reform of the Arbitration Law, promoting greater efficiency, legal certainty, and speeding up procedural times.
These improvements are consistent with the understanding of extrajudicial methods of dispute prevention and resolution, combined with the avoided transaction costs. This creates improved economic flow and well-being for all parties: businesses, corporations, and individuals, in essence, civil society. Improvements in production costs and opportunity costs. There will always be a transaction problem, although the choice of the appropriate territorial forum, understanding the jurisdiction most closely aligned with the interests of the parties to the conflict, and taking into account international shopping law, will lead to well-being if the solution is tailored to avoid or mitigate the biggest problem. The advice of the most appropriate professionals will certainly be necessary, as we foresee from the Iberian Chapter European Branch of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators that relevance is the key, the development of a rigorous study of the best prevention before the conflict, advising our clients: Civil Society.