dc.contributor.author | Nousia, KP | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-11-30T12:42:36Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019-01-31 | |
dc.description.abstract | In 1989 the Departmental Advisory Committee on Arbitration Law (the DAC),
recommended that England should not adopt the UNCITRAL Model Law of Arbitration (Model
Law) and that, instead, there should be a new and improved Arbitration Act.
This article reviews the AA 1996 and the need for reform. It focuses on the main issues
that have attracted judicial attention in the 21 years of its operation in England and other
jurisdictions and draws conclusions from the judicial lessons learnt in other jurisdictions
which have either enacted the Model Law per se or may have largely based the product of their
legislative enactment on the Model Law. In the light of the above analysis, the article finally
address the question of the suitability or not of the AA 1996, the question of whether the time
for yet another reform has arrived and it also assesses the suitability of the Model Law. | en_GB |
dc.identifier.citation | Vol. 2019 (2), pp. 140-162. | en_GB |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10871/30529 | |
dc.language.iso | en | en_GB |
dc.publisher | Sweet and Maxwell | en_GB |
dc.rights.embargoreason | Under embargo until 31 January 2020 in compliance with publisher policy. | en_GB |
dc.rights | © 2019 Sweet & Maxwell. | |
dc.title | The Arbitration Act 1996: Time for Reform? | en_GB |
dc.type | Article | en_GB |
dc.identifier.issn | 0021-9460 | |
dc.description | This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available online via Westlaw. | en_GB |
dc.identifier.journal | Journal of Business Law | en_GB |