We use cookies to improve your website experience. To learn about our use of cookies and how you can manage your cookie settings, please see our Cookie Policy. By continuing to use the website, you consent to our use of cookies. Close

3 NATURE OF ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS

Arbitration Law

Chapter 3 NATURE OF ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS THE MEANING OF “ARBITRATION AGREEMENT” Definitions 3.1 Prior to the implementation of the Arbitration Act 1996, there were two definitions of the term “arbitration agreement” to be found in the legislation. The general definition in s 32 of the Arbitration Act 1950—“a written agreement to submit present or future differences to arbitration”—was relevant for the purposes of the domestic regime contained in the Arbitration Acts 1950 and 1979 and the Consumer Arbitration Agreements Act 1988. The second definition—“an agreement in writing (including an agreement contained in an exchange of letters or telegrams) to submit present or future differences capable of settlement by arbitration”—was contained in s 7 of the Arbitration Act 1975, and was relevant only for determining the circumstances in which an English court was obliged to stay judicial proceedings in favour of arbitration where the agreement was non-domestic. The slight difference in wording reflected the terms of art II.1 of the New York Convention 1958, which was implemented by the 1975 Act and which provides that “Each Contracting State shall recognise an agreement in writing under which the parties undertake to submit to arbitration all or any differences which have arisen or which may arise between them in respect of a defined legal relationship, whether contractual or not, concerning a subject matter capable of settlement by arbitration”. The main differences between the two sections were a brief attempt to explain the term “writing”, in the light of the extended definition of writing in art II.2 of the New York Convention, discussed below, and the statement that only matters capable of settlement by arbitration fell within the scope of the word. Neither of these drafting differences was thought to have any substantive effect, as the concepts of joinder of documents and the non-arbitrability of certain forms of dispute were recognised both long before and under the 1950 Act.

The rest of this document is only available to i-law.com online subscribers.

If you are already a subscriber, please enter your details below to log in.

Enter your email address to log in as a user on your corporate account.
Remember me on this computer

Not yet an i-law subscriber?

Devices

Request a trial Find out more