This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comment

← Sharia Law: neither equal nor free

Alan4discussion's Avatar Jump to comment 28 by Alan4discussion

Comment 2 by Red Dog

An ignorant American trying to understand this, so in the UK you have arbitration boards that can take the place of traditional courts for certain communities (e.g. Muslims) and certain crimes? Is that correct?

If I've got it right then why in the world do you do this? Is this some sop to multiculturalism? It seems like a terrible idea to me, IMO there should be one set of secular laws for everyone in any nation. I don't really see any advantage to these kinds of arbitration boards. I don't even see the logical rational for them.

The usual purpose of arbitration is in the settlement of civil disputes - particularly on employment cases or on technical issues, where architects or engineers would be better qualified to pass judgement than a legally qualified judge (who may have no understanding of science or technology at all).

http://blogs.findlaw.co.uk/solicitor/2010/05/arbitration-law-everything-you-need-to-know---part-1.html - ... ... .. Second, there are certain types of specialist arbitration bodies who might have significant professional expertise relevant to the dispute. For example, a chartered mechanical engineer might also have training as an arbitrator and hold himself out as someone who is available to arbitrate disputes in the construction industry.

The Arbitration Act 1996 governs the arbitration system in the UK. Although the parties have considerable freedom on how to structure arbitration proceedings, the Act stipulates a few mandatory requirements (i.e., regarding immunity, appeals, enforcement, payment of fees, etc) and certain default rules which apply if the parties do not agree other rules before arbitration begins.

Although one idea behind arbitration is that it avoids court proceedings, under the Arbitration Act 1996 the court retains certain powers. For example, the court can grant interim injunctions, make an order requiring evidence to be preserved, and enforce arbitral awards.

Where there is an arbitration agreement, whether as part of a larger agreement between the parties or (perhaps more unusually) as a separate stand-alone arbitration agreement, each party is entitled to a "stay" of court proceedings - this means court action cannot recommence until the parties conclude arbitration.

A party can also appeal certain matters to the court. For example, a party can appeal to the court if it believes that the arbitral tribunal lacks jurisdiction or if the tribunal has ruled incorrectly on a matter of law (although the parties can agree in advance to exclude a right of appeal on questions of law).

Clearly an arbitration hearing by a religious leader is somewhat different to using a specialist from some technical professional institution.

Fri, 01 Jun 2012 15:05:22 UTC | #944989