Author granted license

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International

Document Type


Publication Date





Chartered Institute of Arbitrators




Arbitration unfolds within an enclosure created by the contract terms and the applicable arbitration law. Some measure of judicial scrutiny must be imposed to ensure that an award does not fall beyond an arbitrator’s authority. But how should one identify excess of authority? The House of Lords decision in Lesotho Highlands v. Impreglio serves as a prism through which to separate several themes that inhere in the nature of arbitral authority. In rejecting arguments that an error about the currency of an award represented an excess of jurisdiction, their Lordships confirmed a healthy appreciation that arbitrators do not exceed their powers simply by making a mistake. Moving past Lesotho Highlands, this article suggests that defining jurisdictional excess in arbitration implicates a tension between the principle that awards should be final on the merits and the equally important rule that arbitration must remain consensual.

Find on SSRN

Included in

Law Commons



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.