International Arbitration

International Arbitration Information by Aceris Law LLC

  • International Arbitration Resources
  • Search Engine
  • Model Request for Arbitration
  • Model Answer to Request for Arbitration
  • Find International Arbitrators
  • Blog
  • Arbitration Laws
  • Arbitration Lawyers
You are here: Home / London Arbitration / Formal Requirements an Arbitration Award Must Satisfy to Be Enforceable in England and Wales: Anthony Lombard-Knight v Rainstorm [2014] EWCA Civ 356

Formal Requirements an Arbitration Award Must Satisfy to Be Enforceable in England and Wales: Anthony Lombard-Knight v Rainstorm [2014] EWCA Civ 356

12/05/2017 by International Arbitration

This case concerns the formal requirements that an arbitration award must satisfy in order to be enforceable in England and Wales under the New York Convention of 1958 and the Arbitration Act 1996.

Those instruments require that an arbitration award be duly authenticated or that its copy be duly certified. This case concerns the meaning of the certification required under the New York Convention and the Arbitration Act 1996.

In this case, an arbitration occurred between the parties before the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service of Los Angeles, California (“JAMS”), according to the arbitration clauses found in the agreements, in which a company named Rainstorm was awarded US$ 28 million in compensation.

Formal Requirements an Arbitration Award

Following this award, on 29 August 2012, Rainstorm filed for enforcement of the award before the Commercial Court in London.

Attached with its claim were photocopies of the Agreements, a copy of the arbitration award as well as a document named “Certification of Award.”

In September 2012, an order was issued to grant enforcement of the award. However, Anthony Lombard-Knight filed to set aside the said order on the ground, inter alia, that it was defective under Section 102(1) of the Arbitration Act 1996 since no original documents or certified copies were produced.

The Court of first instance agreed with the challenge, but rejected the substantive grounds of the challenge to the enforcement of the award.

Both parties then appealed, and the Court of Appeal invalidated the Court’s ruling and reasoning.

The Court of Appeal held that the documents were properly certified in compliance with the Arbitration Act 1996. It determined that, unlike the first instance decision’s reasoning, the Arbitration Act 1996 does not require the documents to be authentic. What matters is the belief that the document is a true copy.

Moreover, the Arbitration Act 1996 does not require copies of arbitration agreements to be certified. This would be contrary to the intent and purpose of the New York Convention itself in the promotion of enforcement of awards.

Filed Under: Arbitration Award, Arbitration Procedure, Arbitration Rules, Enforcement of Arbitration Award, London Arbitration, New York Convention, United Kingdom Arbitration

Search Arbitration Information

Errors in the Employer’s Requirements under FIDIC Contracts: Legal Implications and Lessons Learned

Managing Construction Disputes: Understanding the Causes

China’s New Arbitration Law 2025: Overview of Key Changes

Unpaid Invoices and International Arbitration: Is It Worth It?

AI Construction Arbitrator: Revolutionising the Future of International Arbitration?

Effective Case Management in International Arbitration

Analysing the Site Visit Model Protocol for International Arbitration

Interpreting Treaties in Investment Arbitration

Blowing the Whistle on CAS: The CJEU’s RFC Seraing v. FIFA Decision

How Enforcement Works: Turning Arbitral Awards into Real-World Results

Notice of Arbitration by SMS: Efficiency vs. Fairness

Avoiding Pathological Arbitration Clauses: Do’s and Don’ts for In-House Counsel

© 2012-2025 · IA