In section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (challenging the award: substantive jurisdiction), after subsection (3A) (as inserted by section 10(3)) insert—

“(3B)

Rules of court about the procedure to be followed on an application under this section may, in particular, include provision within subsection (3C) in relation to a case where the application—

(a)

relates to an objection as to the arbitral tribunal’s substantive jurisdiction on which the tribunal has already ruled, and

(b)

is made by a party that took part in the arbitral proceedings.

(3C)

Provision is within this subsection if it provides that subject to the court ruling otherwise in the interests of justice—

(a)

a ground for the objection that was not raised before the arbitral tribunal must not be raised before the court unless the applicant shows that, at the time the applicant took part in the proceedings, the applicant did not know and could not with reasonable diligence have discovered the ground;

(b)

evidence that was not put before the tribunal must not be considered by the court unless the applicant shows that, at the time the applicant took part in the proceedings, the applicant could not with reasonable diligence have put the evidence before the tribunal;

(c)

evidence that was heard by the tribunal must not be re-heard by the court.

(3D)

Subsection (3B) does not limit the generality of the power to make rules of court.”