header-logo header-logo

28 March 2013 / James Harrison
Issue: 7554 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Arbitration
printer mail-detail

Assess now or pay later

How do courts deal with the question of costs where an arbitration award is being challenged? James Harrison reports

The usual rule in dispute resolution, whether court-based litigation or arbitration, is that the losing party pays a substantial proportion of the winning party’s legal costs. Arbitrations and arbitration clauses have been enthusiastically embraced because their consensual nature affords parties greater flexibility as to how they manage their costs.

However, even with this advantage of flexibility, the costs of commencing or defending arbitration will be foremost in a party’s mind when considering their options. It is commercially critical to prevent the costs of litigating a dispute from becoming disproportionate to the claim in question. If you add an unscrupulous opponent which has hidden its assets, then a party is faced with a perfect storm with very little prospect of recovering any of its costs. Therefore, a key consideration in any form of dispute resolution is the question of costs and how to manage and obtain security for them throughout a dispute.

This

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

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
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
back-to-top-scroll