ENGLAND & WALES Law and Practice Contributed by: James Stacey, Peter Wickham, Samantha Holland and William Humphries, Slaughter and May
12. Enforcement of an Award 12.1 New York Convention
tral process and any available recourse under Section 57 to correct or obtain an additional award (Section 70 (2)). The 2025 Act has clarified that the relevant “recourse” is that available under the parties’ arbitra - tion agreement (eg, in the chosen institutional rules) (Section 70 (9)). A challenge or appeal must be brought within 28 days of the date of the award or of being notified of the out - come of any appeal or review in the arbitral process (Section 70 (3)). Where a request for correction of an award is first made under Section 57, the 2025 Act has inserted a new Section 70 (3A) into the 1996 Act to clarify that the date of an award for the purposes of the 28-day period for challenge or appeal runs from the date of any material correction or additional award under Section 57 or, where the Section 57 application is unsuccessful, from the date the applicant/appel - lant was notified of that decision. For these purposes, “material” means any matter that is material to the challenge or appeal (Section 70 (3B)). The changes brought in by the 2025 Act largely codify the existing case law position – eg, Daewoo Ship- building and Marine Engineering v Songa Offshore Equinox [2018] EWHC 538 (Comm). 11.2 Excluding/Expanding the Scope of Appeal Section 69 is not mandatory and can be excluded by party agreement. It is often disapplied by the parties agreeing certain institutional rules, such as the ICC rules (Article 28.6) and LCIA rules (Article 26.8). Sections 67 and 68 are mandatory, so the right to challenge an arbitral award for lack of jurisdiction or a serious irregularity cannot be excluded by party agreement. 11.3 Standard of Judicial Review The standard of review adopted by the court for an appeal on a point of law under Section 69 is intended to be deferential rather than meticulous ( Zermalt Hold- ings SA v Nu-Life Upholstery Repairs Limited [1985] 275 EG 1134).
The UK (England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scot - land) is party to the New York Convention, so foreign awards made in the territory of another state that is party to the New York Convention are binding in the UK. Sections 101 to 104 of the 1996 Act provide for the enforcement of awards under the New York Con - vention. The UK is also party to the Geneva Convention on the Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1927, and an arbitral award that is made in the territory of a con - tracting party can be enforced under the 1996 Act (Section 99). The Geneva Convention 1927 has largely been superseded by the New York Convention. The UK has also enacted: • the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933, which provides for the reciprocal recog - nition and enforcement of arbitral awards in former Commonwealth countries, although this statute has largely been superseded by the New York Convention; and • the Arbitration (International Investment Disputes) Act 1966, which provides for the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards from the Interna - tional Centre for Settlement of Investment Dis - putes. 12.2 Enforcement Procedure Section 66 of the 1996 Act sets out a summary pro - cedure for the enforcement of English-seated awards. First, an arbitral award may “by leave of the court, be enforced in the same manner as a judgment or order of the court” (Section 66 (1)). Alternatively, an award can be converted into a court judgment (Section 66 (2)). In practice, the Section 66 (2) mechanism is rarely used. An award can also be enforced by action on the award for failure to comply with the award (Section 66 (4)). Again, this method is rarely used in practice. The enforcing party will need to apply to the court for permission following the procedure in CPR 62. This
217 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook