1. ARBITRATION in SCOTLAND the RENAISSANCE a presentation by HEW R. DUNDAS Chartered Arbitrator DipICArb CEDR-Accredited Mediator Past President CIArb Co-Author “Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010” to CIArb East Anglia Branch 1 st June 2012

2. OVERVIEW of PRESENTATION  Introduction  The History  Attempts at Reform 1985-2008  The 2008/09 Bill  The 2010 Act  Alternative to Adjudication ?  Conclusions

3. HISTORY of ARBITRATION in SCOTLAND  Ancient Origins  Cambuskenneth Abbey v Dunfermline Abbey (1207)  Regiam Majestatem c.1300  Legislative History  Acts of 1598, 1695, 1894  Administration of Justice (Scotland) Act 1972  Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1990  The 2002 Bill – CIArb + others

4. DEFICIENCIES in OLD LAW (1)  No concept of severability  Kompetenz-Kompetenz rejected  Caledonian Railway (1872)  No inherent/implied power to award damages, expenses or interest  Stated Case Procedure  S.3 Administration of Justice (Scotland) Act 1972  Unclear whether Court Rules of Evidence applied

5. DEFICIENCIES in OLD LAW (2)  No slip rule;  No provision regarding privacy or confidentiality  No provision for partial or interim awards  Immunity of arbitrators unclear  A Party can be the [sole] arbiter  Inaccessibility of the law  Reliance on a Clerk  Reliance on ancient authority

6. UNCITRAL & the MODEL LAW  Origins  New York Convention 1958  Why UNCITRAL exists  UNCITRAL Rules 1976, revised 2010  Model Law 1985, revised 2006  S.26 of the 2010 Act  Repeal of the 1990 legislation  Fundamentally flawed

7. THE 2009 BILL  Consultation process June-Dec. 2008  Consultation draft September 2008  Bill published 30 th January 2009  Parliamentary Process  Stages 1/2/3  Hearings  CIArb submissions – 42,000 words  Parliament Approves 18 th November 2009  Royal Assent 5 th January 2010

8. The ACT: MAIN FEATURES (1)  Single integrated Act  compare Ireland/Singapore/NZ et al  UNCITRAL Model Law compliant  Unprecedentedly extensive international research  International Best Practice – UNCITRAL Rules 2010 and s.26  Procedural Rules in Schedule 1

9. The ACT: MAIN FEATURES (2)  Easy-to-use structure – Part 1, Part 2 etc  User-friendly explanatory Rules  Mandatory and Default Rules  Mandatory – fundamental principles which cannot be modified or discarded  Default – can be modified/deleted, otherwise applicable; no vacuum  Role of the Arbitration Agreement  Death of the Submission Agreement

10. The ACT: MAIN FEATURES (3)  “Consumer” Arbitration  ss.89-91 AA96  SSFARs to £25,000 (indicative upper limit)  Transitional Provisions  Arbitration Acts 1889, 1934, 1950, 1979, 1996  Dinosaurs Still Live !!!  Retain Old Law in Perpetuity  >5 year period

11. KEY IMPROVEMENTS (1)  Role of the Courts reduced to bare minimum  First instance judgment “more final”  No appeal from any decision by Sheriff  Almost no access to Inner House  NO appeal AT ALL to UK Supreme Court  BUT court will support where necessary  Law governing Arbitration Agreement (s.6)  Oral arbitration agreements included  Arbitrator to be an individual (Rule 3M)

12. KEY IMPROVEMENTS (2)  Resignation of Arbitrator (Rule 15M)  Immunity Issue (R16M)  Anonymity in Legal Proceedings (s.15)  Confidentiality (Rule 26D)  Parties can opt out e.g. Public Authorities  Independence of Arbitrator (Rule 8M)  AARs (s.22/Rule 7M)  CIArb/RICS/LSoS/FoA + others

13. KEY IMPROVEMENTS (3)  “Dermajaya” provision (s.32(1))  Gannet v Eastrade (Rule 58(7)(b) - D)  Cetelem v Roust (Rule 46(4)(b) - D)  Simplified Language of the Act  Arbiter, oversman, decree arbitral – all gone  Sist, expenses  Economy  “Plain English” Policy  User-friendly approach

14. COMPARISON with the 1996 ACT  Reduced Role of the Court  AARs (s.22/R7M)  Disclosure of Conflicts (Rule 8M)  Resignation of Arbitrator (R15M)  Confidentiality (Rule 26D)  Gannet/Cetelem (R46D/58D)  Language/Style

15. RECOMMENDED READING  ARBITRATION (SCOTLAND) ACT 2010  by Fraser Davidson, Hew R Dundas & David Bartos  Pub. W Green & Co (Edinburgh) 2010  ISBN 978-0-414-017772-6  Published Same Day as Act Came into Force  The Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010: Converting Vision into Reality  [2010] 76 ARBITRATION 2 at p.15  See also [2004] 70 ARBITRATION 2

16. ALTERNATIVE to ADJUDICATION ?  Arbitrator control of proceedings e.g. R28D  More detailed process R28-R40  Court Support R45M+46D  Wider range of tools e.g. R41D+42M  Finality  Enforceability

17. CONCLUSIONS THANK YOU for listening to me this morning