Originally from Investment Treaty Arbitration and International Law - Volume 18

Preview Page

I. INTRODUCTION

England and America are two countries divided by a common language. - George Bernard Shaw

Comparisons between the United Kingdom and the United States of America are mainstream, but in certain cases—like analyzing their legal systems—necessary and make for a fascinating study of the closeness and yet vast differences in their ideologies. 

Both the English and American arbitration frameworks depart from the UNCITRAL Model Law as well as practice in several arbitration jurisdictions by allowing appeals against award on the ground that the tribunal erred on a point of law. That is largely where the similarity ends.

The English approach—“appeal on point of law”—is codified in Section 69 of the English Arbitration Act 1996 (“Arbitration Act”). The American approach—“manifest disregard of law”—however is a result of judicial decisions that derive from a passing remark in the Wilko decision of the Supreme Court. While all levels of the English courts have reviewed awards under Section 69 of the Arbitration Act, the U.S. Supreme Court is yet to review a single award under the so-called manifest disregard doctrine. The difficulties of the weak doctrinal basis of the manifest disregard standard is obvious and unresolved—lower courts in the U.S. have interpreted manifest disregard in an inconsistent and even contradictory manner.