Arbitration Act 2025
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
11 Procedure on challenge under section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996
In section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (challenging the award: substantive jurisdiction), after subsection (3A) (as inserted by section 10(3)) insert— (3B) Rules of court about the procedure to be followed on an application under this section may, in particular, include provision within subsection (3C) in relation to a case where the application— (a) relates to an objection as to the arbitral tribunal’s substantive jurisdiction on which the tribunal has already ruled, and (b) is made by a party that took part in the arbitral proceedings. (3C) Provision is within this subsection if it provides that subject to the court ruling otherwise in the interests of justice— (a) a ground for the objection that was not raised before the arbitral tribunal must not be raised before the court unless the applicant shows that, at the time the applicant took part in the proceedings, the applicant did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have discovered the ground; (b) evidence that was not put before the tribunal must not be considered by the court unless the applicant shows that, at the time the applicant took part in the proceedings, the applicant could not with reasonable diligence have put the evidence before the tribunal; (c) evidence that was heard by the tribunal must not be re-heard by the court. (3D) Subsection (3B) does not limit the generality of the power to make rules of court.
11 Procedure on challenge under section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996
In section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (challenging the award: substantive jurisdiction), after subsection (3A) (as inserted by section 10(3)) insert— (3B) Rules of court about the procedure to be followed on an application under this section may, in particular, include provision within subsection (3C) in relation to a case where the application— (a) relates to an objection as to the arbitral tribunal’s substantive jurisdiction on which the tribunal has already ruled, and (b) is made by a party that took part in the arbitral proceedings. (3C) Provision is within this subsection if it provides that subject to the court ruling otherwise in the interests of justice— (a) a ground for the objection that was not raised before the arbitral tribunal must not be raised before the court unless the applicant shows that, at the time the applicant took part in the proceedings, the applicant did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have discovered the ground; (b) evidence that was not put before the tribunal must not be considered by the court unless the applicant shows that, at the time the applicant took part in the proceedings, the applicant could not with reasonable diligence have put the evidence before the tribunal; (c) evidence that was heard by the tribunal must not be re-heard by the court. (3D) Subsection (3B) does not limit the generality of the power to make rules of court.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.