The new UK Arbitration Act 2025

Conclusions and how Danish arbitration law compares 

The new UK Arbitration Act introduces a refined framework for arbitrations seated in England and Wales. The reform is designed to maintain London’s competitive edge in the global arbitration landscape, with clearer rules on jurisdiction, disclosure, and emergency procedures.  

For Danish stakeholders active in international commerce, these changes offer a useful point of comparison. Danish arbitration law, as codified in the Danish Arbitration Act, remains internationally compatible, but it does not currently codify a number of mechanisms now firmly embedded in the UK framework. By way of illustration, the Danish Arbitration Act does not expressly provide for summary disposal, nor does it contain any provisions on emergency arbitrators. While such outcomes may be achieved under Danish law through party autonomy and institutional rules - such as those of the Danish Institute of Arbitration - the two frameworks remain structurally distinct. 

Key changes

The reform preserves the overall structure of the 1996 Act but introduces several important updates:  

• Codification of arbitrator’s duty of disclosure: The new Act introduces a clear statutory obligation requiring arbitrators to proactively disclose any circumstances that might reasonably give rise to justifiable doubts as to their impartiality, both before and after appointment. This codifies the English Supreme Court’s guidance in Halliburton v Chubb and aligns the UK with international arbitration standards, enhancing transparency and confidence in arbitral impartiality. 

• Strengthened arbitrator immunity: Arbitrators are now afforded stronger protection from liability arising from resignation or removal. Specifically, arbitrators are shielded from liability unless a resignation is unreasonable or removal proceedings demonstrate bad faith. This amendment seeks to provide a more secure environment for arbitral decision-making. 

• Introduction of summary disposal powers: Tribunals now have express statutory authority to summarily dismiss claims, defences or jurisdictional challenges lacking any realistic prospect of success. Similar to summary judgment procedures in English courts, this power is expected to reduce time and cost by disposing of clearly unmeritorious issues. 

• Enhanced framework for jurisdictional challenges: The new Act ntroduces important reforms to the procedure for jurisdictional challenges under Section 67 of the 1996 Act. Under the new rules, where a tribunal has already ruled on its jurisdiction and the challenging party participated in those proceedings, the court will not conduct a full rehearing. Instead, the court will rely on the existing record and exclude new grounds or evidence unless necessary in the interests of justice. By limiting the scope of re-litigation, the new provisions promote finality, reduce duplication and lower the cost and duration of enforcement proceedings. 

• Default rule governing arbitration agreement law: Arbitration agreements will now default to the law of the selected arbitration seat unless the parties expressly choose otherwise. This clarification resolves prior uncertainties stemming from cases such as Enka v Chubb, mitigates risks associated with unclear arbitration clauses and reduces the scope for expensive jurisdictional disputes. Importantly, the Act also clarifies that a choice of law for the main contract does not automatically extend to the arbitration clause. 

• Clarification of court powers: The new Act explicitly reinforces the judiciary’s supportive role in arbitration, detailing courts' powers to enforce interim orders issued by emergency arbitrators and compel third-party cooperation with arbitration proceedings. This significantly enhances arbitration efficiency by ensuring that interim relief mechanisms are robustly supported by judicial intervention. 

• Support of emergency arbitrators: Where institutional rules provide for their appointment (such as the LCIA or ICC Rules), emergency arbitrators are now granted powers equivalent to those of a fully constituted tribunal. This includes issuing peremptory orders enforceable by the court and granting permission to seek interim measures under section 44. 

Additional minor corrections 

The new Act also introduces minor corrections, including allowing appeals from applications to stay legal proceedings, simplifying preliminary applications to court on jurisdiction and points of law, clarifying time limits for challenging awards and repealing unused provisions on domestic arbitration agreements. 

Background 

The reform largely reflects the recommendations made by the Law Commission in its Final Report of 6 September 2023 and aims to renew English-seated arbitration procedures, enhance judicial support and improve procedural transparency. 

In March 2021, the Ministry of Justice assigned the Law Commission to assess whether the 1996 Act remained fit for purpose and continued to support England and Wales as preferred seats for international arbitration. After two public consultations in 2022 and 2023, the Commission submitted final recommendations, which form the basis of the new Act. Rather than replacing the 1996 Act, the reform updates and clarifies key provisions. The new rules apply to arbitrations and related court proceedings commenced on or after 1 August 2025. 

Our advisory services 

Our litigation and arbitration specialists at Kromann Reumert have extensive experience in conducting and advising on international arbitration cases. Please feel free to contact us if you wish to know more about the new provisions. Our experienced dispute resolution team - supported by our strategically positioned London office - provides excellent legal advice tailored specifically to the requirements of international arbitration under the new Act.