Starting an arbitration

This subtopic provides practical guidance on how to start (or commence) arbitration proceedings under the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) and related matters, including taking into account pre-arbitration obligations and other considerations.

Generally speaking, this subtopic provides guidance on starting an arbitration under English and Welsh law and the AA 1996, which applies, with some exceptions, to arbitrations seated in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Guidance on related court procedure is limited to the courts of England and Wales (England and English are used as convenient shorthand). Practitioners may find some of the guidance relevant to arbitrations seated outside of these jurisdictions.

To compare how arbitrations are commenced in jurisdictions around the world, please see our International Comparator Tool.

Matters to consider prior to starting the arbitration

Prior to commencing arbitration proceedings, or when in receipt of a notice requiring arbitration, it will typically be relevant to consider whether pre-arbitration conditions or formalities have been complied with and act accordingly. Guidance on this and other related matters is included in Practice Notes: AA 1996—starting an ad hoc arbitration and

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Arbitration News

Who decides what? Clarifying the boundaries of Appellate Control over Exequatur in France(France – Federative Republic of Brazil (União) v [J])

Arbitration analysis: On 8 January 2026, the Paris Court of Appeal, sitting through the conseiller de la mise en état, held that it lacked jurisdiction to determine the admissibility of a plea seeking annulment of an exequatur order on the basis of an alleged excess of power of the first-instance judge. According to the court, such a plea concerns the appeal itself and therefore falls within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal sitting as a full bench, rather than that of the conseiller de la mise en état acting alone. The order was made in proceedings concerning the exequatur in France of a partial award rendered in São Paulo under the auspices of the Câmara de Arbitragem do Mercado (CAM), in a shareholder dispute between minority shareholders of Petrobras and the Federative Republic of Brazil (the União). Although the ruling addresses a strictly procedural issue, it usefully clarifies the allocation of functions between the pre-trial judge (conseiller de la mise en état) and the appellate bench in proceedings brought against exequatur orders under article 1527 of the French Code of Civil Procedure. It confirms that a procedural argument seeking to invalidate the appeal (fin de non-recevoir), where that argument is in fact tied to the substance of the appeal itself, must be decided by the full bench and cannot be filtered out by a single judge at the pre-trial stage. The ruling therefore has practical implications for how parties should frame and time their procedural arguments in exequatur-related appeals. Written by Marie-Laure Cartier and Alexandre Meyniel, partners at Cartier Meyniel AARPI with Sami Kabbara, trainee lawyer at the Paris Bar Centre and intern at Cartier Meyniel AARPI.

Delos to host comparative contract law presentation on 24 March 2026 during Paris Arbitration Week

Delos has announced a presentation on comparative contract law to be held on 24 March 2026 as part of Paris Arbitration Week. The event will explore good faith, principles of contractual interpretation and change of circumstances. Leading practitioners will discuss the understanding and application of these concepts under English, French and German law, with a focus on underlying principles. Speakers will include Gustavo Moser of the LexisNexis UK Arbitration team, and Vivek Kapoor, Arbitration Consulting Editorial Board member. The event will be held at the Paris Arbitration Centre, with an online session available for remote participants.

Iceland notifies withdrawal from Energy Charter Treaty effective March 2027

The Energy Charter Secretariat has announced that Iceland has submitted written notification of its decision to withdraw from the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT). Under Article 47 of the ECT, the withdrawal will take effect one year after receipt of the notification by the Secretariat. Accordingly, Iceland’s withdrawal will take effect on 17 March 2027.

International arbitration (Tecnimont, KT-Kinetics Technology v TotalEnergies EP Italia)

Arbitration analysis: The Paris Court of Appeal dismissed a challenge to partially annul an ICC partial award arising from an EPC project dispute, holding that the tribunal’s decision to bifurcate proceedings on a ground not raised by the parties does not exceed its mandate where the applicable rules permit bifurcation. The court also dismissed challenges based on due process and international public policy, emphasising that the parties had ample opportunity to debate the bifurcation. This decision confirms the broad discretion afforded to arbitral tribunals in procedural management and the high threshold for annulment on this ground. Practitioners in construction and energy disputes should advise clients on bifurcation strategy early, as challenges to such decisions rarely succeed. Written by Clément Fouchard, partner at Reed Smith, and Mathilde Adant, associate at Reed Smith.