JUDICIAL INTERVENTION, PARTY AUTONOMY, AND EFFICIENCY: A COMPARATIVE DOCTRINAL STUDY OF THE UK ARBITRATION ACTS 1996 AND 2025

Abstract

This paper engages in a comparative approach of the Arbitration Act of 1996 of the United Kingdom and the recently enacted Arbitration Act 2025 and explores the contribution which these legislations have made in terms of the refinement of the arbitration law and practice. The 1996 Act, arguably a landmark in modern-day arbitration law, codified some of the most fundamental principles of arbitration, i.e., party autonomy, restraint on judicial intervention and fairness of the procedure which made London a leading arbitral seat. However, the development of international arbitration and development of new challenges, such as efficiency issues, confidentiality and the proliferation of the use of digital platforms has over the last 3 decades required reform. The Arbitration Act 2025 moves forward in such a way that it does not displace the existing framework, instead of adding provisions on summary disposal, emergency arbitrators, clarified principles on confidentiality and a more articulated scope of judicial review. These reforms are in line with international best practices and it maintains the stability that the UK is known to be predictable internationally. The analysis conclude that the 2025 Act will provide London with even stronger competitive advantage in terms of procedural control, responsive court supervision and of adherence to the values that have always guided the English arbitration law.

Keywords: Arbitration Act 1996; Arbitration Act 2025; international arbitration; party autonomy; judicial intervention; procedural efficiency; confidentiality; arbitral reform; London as arbitral seat; comparative arbitration law.