This decision greatly reinforces the concept of the arbitral autonomy, where limitation and timeliness of claims are generally arbitral issues and not issues for the court to refer. The judgment is likely to be unfavourable for any infrastructure contractor or public authorities who are attempting to avoid arbitration by raising ‘threshold’ objections and will help to get tribunals up and running quickly. The decision also upholds the contractual notion that disputes to be resolved by arbitration should be done without undue deference to court review at the appointment stage. Practical considerations include readiness of stakeholders to make and defend objections relating to limitations before the tribunal itself, which helps to increase efficiency, avoid delays in proceedings and ensure certainty of enforcement of arbitration agreements.
