Abstract/Summary

Arbitration allows parties to exercise party autonomy giving effect to the parties’ choice to refer their disputes to arbitration, whereby the expectation is that national courts should only intervene to support and not displace the mechanism of alternative dispute resolution via arbitration. This article examines appeals in arbitration as per section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (now 2025) and the English arbitration law reform project, with a focus on the position as to appeals in arbitration in the sectors of reinsurance arbitrations and investment arbitrations under ICSID. The article also aims to juxtapose and compare the position in reinsurance arbitrations with the position under the UNCITRAL Model Law and the position in the jurisdictions of China and Singapore, so as to provide valuable insights. Such a comparison is not unjustified as in investment arbitrations, under the ICSID Convention, there is no appeal mechanism. The UNCITRAL Model also does not provide for the right to appeal an arbitral award, whilst Singapore is considering a law reform to allow appeals, if parties have contracted or opted in for it to enhance functionality and party autonomy and in China, according to both the Arbitration Law and the Civil Procedure Law appeals on arbitral awards are not allowed. Overall, the discussion illustrates how the right to appeal on legal grounds is interpreted differently across various sectors, reflecting distinct party expectations and allows the conclusion that addressing the misuse of the appeals mechanism could further strengthen the effectiveness of arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism.