Support for the President’s analysis of the effect of an arbitral award

March 11, 2015 Posted by:

‘Indeed Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division, has recently directed that a spouse attempting to reject an award made following her or his submission to arbitration by a member of the Institute of Family Law Arbitrators should also be subject to the show-cause procedure: S v S (Arbitral Award: Approval), Practice Note, [2014] EWHC 7 (Fam), [2014] 1 WLR 2299, [2014] 1 FLR 1257.’

Thus at [29] of Wyatt v Vince has Lord Wilson inferentially added the Supreme Court’s imprimatur to support the use of the show-cause procedure to promote speedy resolution of any instances of post-arbitral tristesse.

In drawing together the threads of the FPR rule 1.4 overriding objective components which require the case management judge ‘to promptly identify the issues, isolate those which need full investigation and tailor future procedure accordingly,’ this passage clearly endorses the President’s references to an ‘abbreviated’ hearing in such situations, just as where there is a dispute whether a resiling spouse should be held to an agreement: see S v S at [13], [14] and [25].