London Maritime Arbitration
Page 303
CHAPTER 19
Arbitration awards
A. Introduction
19.1 There is no definition of an award in the 1996 Act, although section 52 identifies the formal requirements and section 58 describes an award as the final and binding decision of the tribunal made pursuant to an arbitration agreement.1 As a matter of substance an award is a decision finally disposing of a relevant matter in dispute.2 19.2 It is important that an award should be final since this reflects the choice of the parties to use arbitration to resolve their disputes and not merely as a precursor to court proceedings. Moreover, as a matter of policy, finality is important since the object of arbitration is to provide an efficient and speedy means of resolving a dispute once and for all. The significance of finality in arbitration means that the procedures available for challenging an award in court are limited (see ). The courts are always reluctant to allow challenges to be used to prolong a dispute and to this end they are inclined to adopt a generous approach to the interpretation of awards.3Page 304
B. Decision-making
19.6 In the interests of candour, the deliberations of arbitrators when forming their decisions are confidential. Apart from the reasons given with an award the parties are not entitled to know how the decision was reached.8 If a dispute is determined by a sole arbitrator, then he clearly acts alone in deciding the case and writing the award. Decision-making is less simple where there is more than one arbitrator. The position of dissenting arbitrators and their reasons is considered below. 19.7 The governing principle is that after the end of the hearing (or close of written submissions) the parties are entitled to an impartial and fair consideration of all the issues in the case by all the arbitrators acting together.9 Decision-making must not be delegated: “itPage 305
In European Grain & Shipping Ltd v Johnston
13 one of the arbitrators went to Australia after submissions were made but before an award had been drawn up. He signed three blank award forms and left these with a letter stating his views with the third arbitrator. The other two arbitrators disagreed with his views and issued a majority award on the signed forms. The Court of Appeal held that, subject to a defence of waiver, the award should have been set aside since “an arbitration conducted by a tribunal of several arbitrators necessarily requires a joint process of full and complete adjudication by all of them, so that the ultimate award represents the state of mind of all of them at the time when they sign it”.