header-logo header-logo

02 October 2008
Issue: 7339 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Arbitration clauses in consumer contracts

Janna Purdie considers the fairness of arbitration clauses in consumer contracts

Arbitration agreements and the Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999

The Technology and Construction Court refused to enforce an arbitration award under s 66(3) of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) on the grounds that:
      ●     the arbitrator had not been validly appointed in accordance with AA 1996.
      ●     the arbitration clause did not comply with SI 1999/2083

Facts of the case

The claimant had carried out building work for the defendant and a dispute arose. The claimant's standard terms and conditions provided for any dispute to be referred to arbitration.

The defendant having taken advice, maintained that the standard terms and conditions were contrary to SI 1999/2083 and therefore the arbitration clause did not apply. Therefore, any dispute between the two parties should be dealt with in the courts. The defendant maintained this stance by refusing to participate in the appointment of an arbitrator, disputing the arbitrator's jurisdiction and refusing to take part in the arbitration.

The arbitrator considered that he had

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll