A Comparative Study of the Legislation governing Arbitration in Saudi Arabia and English Law

Abstract

Arbitration has become one of the most attractive methods of dispute resolution between two parties to resolve disputes. This is an alternative to litigation, which is more costly and can take longer to resolve. As a substitute means to resolve international commercial disputes, arbitration has grown significantly, particularly at the international level. Although, parties in certain situation agreed to involve national courts in order to enforce foreign awards; however, it also undermine the party autonomy mechanism. This study investigates the fundamental characteristics of international commercial arbitration within the national courts and its impact on the autonomy of parties. Further, the study also assess the impact of Saudi Vision 2030 in the arbitration legislations in the Kingdom particularly the national courts involvement and party autonomy. A comparative study between Saudi Arabia and English law was conducted to understand both jurisdictions and explain party autonomy and court involvement in the international arbitration process. The study revealed that both jurisdictions have features and strengths regarding their legislation of arbitration and how it promotes their economy through aligning with the international legal system. However, weaknesses and challenges, particularly in Saudi Arabia. The study revealed that while the Saudi Arbitration Law 2012 promotes party autonomy and limits the courts’ involvement, the laws of arbitration are still influenced by Sharia law, and courts are still involved. To support the country’s national development plan, such as Saudi Vision 2030, there is a need to improve the prospect of court involvement and party autonomy and limit the influence of Sharia law. From the study’s findings, there are recommendations suggested to improve Saudi arbitration law and mechanism, which include establishing a Quasi-judicial committee, learning from the arbitration law of England and Wales, employing a hybrid court and arbitration model, and limiting judges’ capacity in arbitration cases. Finally, this research also presented research limitations and future work recommendations.