1 / 17

ARBITRATION in SCOTLAND the RENAISSANCE

ARBITRATION in SCOTLAND the RENAISSANCE. a presentation by HEW R. DUNDAS Chartered Arbitrator DipICArb CEDR-Accredited Mediator Past President CIArb Co-Author “Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010” to CIArb East Anglia Branch 1 st June 2012. OVERVIEW of PRESENTATION. Introduction

aliya
Download Presentation

ARBITRATION in SCOTLAND the RENAISSANCE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ARBITRATION in SCOTLANDthe RENAISSANCE a presentation by HEW R. DUNDAS Chartered Arbitrator DipICArb CEDR-Accredited Mediator Past President CIArb Co-Author “Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010” to CIArb East Anglia Branch 1st June 2012

  2. OVERVIEW of PRESENTATION • Introduction • The History • Attempts at Reform 1985-2008 • The 2008/09 Bill • The 2010 Act • Alternative to Adjudication ? • Conclusions

  3. HISTORY of ARBITRATIONin SCOTLAND • Ancient Origins • Cambuskenneth Abbey v Dunfermline Abbey (1207) • Regiam Majestatem c.1300 • Legislative History • Acts of 1598, 1695, 1894 • Administration of Justice (Scotland) Act 1972 • Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1990 • The 2002 Bill – CIArb + others

  4. DEFICIENCIES in OLD LAW (1) • No concept of severability • Kompetenz-Kompetenz rejected • Caledonian Railway (1872) • No inherent/implied power to award damages, expenses or interest • Stated Case Procedure • S.3 Administration of Justice (Scotland) Act 1972 • Unclear whether Court Rules of Evidence applied

  5. DEFICIENCIES in OLD LAW (2) • No slip rule; • No provision regarding privacy or confidentiality • No provision for partial or interim awards • Immunity of arbitrators unclear • A Party can be the [sole] arbiter • Inaccessibility of the law • Reliance on a Clerk • Reliance on ancient authority

  6. UNCITRAL & the MODEL LAW • Origins • New York Convention 1958 • Why UNCITRAL exists • UNCITRAL Rules 1976, revised 2010 • Model Law 1985, revised 2006 • S.26 of the 2010 Act • Repeal of the 1990 legislation • Fundamentally flawed

  7. THE 2009 BILL • Consultation process June-Dec. 2008 • Consultation draft September 2008 • Bill published 30th January 2009 • Parliamentary Process • Stages 1/2/3 • Hearings • CIArb submissions – 42,000 words • Parliament Approves 18th November 2009 • Royal Assent 5th January 2010

  8. The ACT: MAIN FEATURES (1) • Single integrated Act • compare Ireland/Singapore/NZ et al • UNCITRAL Model Law compliant • Unprecedentedly extensive international research • International Best Practice – UNCITRAL Rules 2010 and s.26 • Procedural Rules in Schedule 1

  9. The ACT: MAIN FEATURES (2) • Easy-to-use structure – Part 1, Part 2 etc • User-friendly explanatory Rules • Mandatory and Default Rules • Mandatory – fundamental principles which cannot be modified or discarded • Default – can be modified/deleted, otherwise applicable; no vacuum • Role of the Arbitration Agreement • Death of the Submission Agreement

  10. The ACT: MAIN FEATURES (3) • “Consumer” Arbitration • ss.89-91 AA96 • SSFARs to £25,000 (indicative upper limit) • Transitional Provisions • Arbitration Acts 1889, 1934, 1950, 1979, 1996 • Dinosaurs Still Live !!! • Retain Old Law in Perpetuity • >5 year period

  11. KEY IMPROVEMENTS (1) • Role of the Courts reduced to bare minimum • First instance judgment “more final” • No appeal from any decision by Sheriff • Almost no access to Inner House • NO appeal AT ALL to UK Supreme Court • BUT court will support where necessary • Law governing Arbitration Agreement (s.6) • Oral arbitration agreements included • Arbitrator to be an individual (Rule 3M)

  12. KEY IMPROVEMENTS (2) • Resignation of Arbitrator (Rule 15M) • Immunity Issue (R16M) • Anonymity in Legal Proceedings (s.15) • Confidentiality (Rule 26D) • Parties can opt out e.g. Public Authorities • Independence of Arbitrator (Rule 8M) • AARs (s.22/Rule 7M) • CIArb/RICS/LSoS/FoA + others

  13. KEY IMPROVEMENTS (3) • “Dermajaya” provision (s.32(1)) • Gannet v Eastrade (Rule 58(7)(b) - D) • Cetelem v Roust (Rule 46(4)(b) - D) • Simplified Language of the Act • Arbiter, oversman, decree arbitral – all gone • Sist, expenses • Economy • “Plain English” Policy • User-friendly approach

  14. COMPARISON with the 1996 ACT • Reduced Role of the Court • AARs (s.22/R7M) • Disclosure of Conflicts (Rule 8M) • Resignation of Arbitrator (R15M) • Confidentiality (Rule 26D) • Gannet/Cetelem (R46D/58D) • Language/Style

  15. RECOMMENDED READING • ARBITRATION (SCOTLAND) ACT 2010 • by Fraser Davidson, Hew R Dundas & David Bartos • Pub. W Green & Co (Edinburgh) 2010 • ISBN 978-0-414-017772-6 • Published Same Day as Act Came into Force • The Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010: Converting Vision into Reality • [2010] 76 ARBITRATION 2 at p.15 • See also [2004] 70 ARBITRATION 2

  16. ALTERNATIVE to ADJUDICATION? • Arbitrator control of proceedings e.g. R28D • More detailed process R28-R40 • Court Support R45M+46D • Wider range of tools e.g. R41D+42M • Finality • Enforceability

  17. CONCLUSIONS THANK YOU for listening to me this morning

More Related