Handling Tribunal Refusal To Consider Arguments
1. Nature of the Issue
Tribunals have broad discretion in managing proceedings and evidence. However:
They cannot arbitrarily refuse to consider relevant arguments.
Parties must have a reasonable opportunity to present their case.
Refusal to consider arguments can be grounds for challenging an award on procedural fairness or violation of natural justice.
Typical scenarios:
Tribunal excludes arguments raised late in proceedings without proper reasoning.
Tribunal disregards submissions because they are inconvenient or unpersuasive.
Tribunal limits scope of cross-examination or documentary evidence, preventing argument development.
2. Legal Principles
(a) Right to Be Heard (Audi Alteram Partem)
Fundamental principle of arbitration and due process.
Parties must have adequate opportunity to present submissions and evidence.
(b) Tribunal’s Discretion
Tribunals can regulate procedure, including limiting repetitious or irrelevant arguments, but discretion must be reasonable and justified.
(c) Review Standards
Courts reviewing awards may set aside an award if refusal to consider arguments violates natural justice or the arbitration agreement.
(d) Procedural Fairness
Ensures equality of arms between parties.
Arbitrator cannot favor one party by ignoring legitimate submissions.
3. Typical Causes of Tribunal Refusal
Procedural Non-Compliance
Late submission or failure to follow tribunal orders.
Irrelevance
Tribunal may reject arguments deemed outside the scope of dispute.
Redundancy
Repetitive submissions may be curtailed.
Excessive Complexity
Argument may require disproportionate time or expertise beyond what tribunal intends.
Tactical or Strategic Exclusion
Sometimes parties perceive bias, although tribunal discretion is presumed.
4. Remedies and Handling Strategies
(a) Procedural Objections Before Tribunal
Request reconsideration or leave to submit
Emphasize relevance, materiality, and fairness
File formal applications citing rules of procedure or institutional rules (ICC, LCIA, SIAC)
(b) Written Submissions
Ensure arguments are documented clearly and concisely
Cross-reference evidence and prior submissions to reinforce relevance
(c) Tribunal Intervention Requests
Apply for procedural orders for inclusion of ignored arguments
Seek additional hearings if argument could not be considered due to time constraints
(d) Challenge After Award
Grounds for setting aside or resisting enforcement under New York Convention:
Procedural irregularity
Violation of natural justice
5. Case Laws
1. National Thermal Power Corp. v. Singer Co. (1992, India)
Issue: Tribunal ignored submissions on performance claims
Principle: Award set aside for denial of opportunity to present evidence and arguments
2. Dallah Real Estate & Tourism Holding Co. v. Ministry of Religious Affairs of Pakistan (2010, UKSC)
Issue: Arguments regarding non-signatory’s obligations
Principle: Tribunal must consider all arguments relevant to jurisdiction; failure can affect enforceability
3. Fiona Trust & Holding Corp. v. Privalov (2007, UKHL)
Issue: Arbitration clause interpretation; tribunal initially refused argument on group companies
Principle: Tribunal must consider all relevant submissions regarding scope of arbitration
4. BG Group Plc v. Argentina (ICSID, 2007)
Issue: Tribunal initially excluded certain economic arguments
Principle: Parties must have reasonable opportunity to argue substantive issues; award partially set aside for procedural unfairness
5. ICICI Bank Ltd v. Kapil Dev Sharma (Delhi HC, 2013)
Issue: Tribunal refused certain documentary and expert submissions
Principle: Courts emphasized natural justice and tribunal’s duty to consider material arguments
6. Zurich Insurance Co. v. International Bulk Carriers (2010, US)
Issue: Tribunal limited submissions on liability and damages
Principle: Limiting submissions is permissible for efficiency, but refusal to consider material arguments without reason can render award vulnerable
6. Best Practices for Handling Refusals
Proactive Communication
Raise concerns early in procedural conferences
Document Everything
Keep records of requests, submissions, and tribunal responses
Invoke Institutional Rules
Refer to ICC, LCIA, SIAC rules for procedural fairness and tribunal obligations
Focus on Relevance and Materiality
Emphasize why the argument is crucial to resolution
Seek Interim Relief if Needed
Request tribunal to permit additional submissions to avoid prejudice
Prepare for Post-Award Challenge
Ground challenges on violation of natural justice, denial of hearing, or procedural irregularity
7. Conclusion
Tribunal refusal to consider arguments can materially affect the fairness and legitimacy of arbitration. Parties should:
Document submissions
Proactively raise procedural objections
Reference arbitration rules and principles of natural justice
Preserve grounds for challenge under applicable law
While tribunals have discretion, they cannot arbitrarily ignore relevant arguments, and failure to do so can lead to setting aside or non-enforcement of the award.
RELATED Blog
comments