UK: Chancery case highlights lack of clarity surrounding staying proceedings under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996

Tuesday, 22 June 2010

Justin Mort, a barrister at Keating Chambers in London specialising in construction law and international arbitration, reports on a recent decision of the Chancery Division in London that draws attention to the English law’s inconsistency regarding the circumstances when a party loses its right to a mandatory stay of court proceedings in favour of arbitration under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996

Archive Subscription required to view this article

This content can only be accessed by GCR subscribers with archive access.

A subscription with archive access includes 6 issues of the journal, The GAR100 and the International Who's Who of Commercial Arbitration and full access to all current print & online content.

If you are a GAR subscriber, please login to access this content:

Law Business Research Ltd

87 Lancaster Road, London
W11 1QQ, UK
Queen's Award logo International Bar Association logo American Bar Association strategic partner logo

Copyright © 2012 Law Business Research Ltd. All rights reserved. | http://www.lbresearch.com

87 Lancaster Road, London, W11 1QQ, UK | Tel: +44 207 908 1188 / Fax: +44 207 229 6910

http://www.globalarbitrationreview.com | editorial@globalarbitrationreview.com