Puzzle 4: This problem arises out of the arbitrator delaying becoming familiarised with the case. This can happen following a (possibly misplaced) intention to save costs or because time has been restricted by other matters. I suggest that this problem could have been avoided by keeping up with the case – there may be no need to read in fully, just sufficient to be properly aware of the situation. I suggest that the best way out of this situation is to hold a procedural meeting to clarify the list of issues and ensure that all matters are within (possibly extended) jurisdiction.
Puzzle 5: Notwithstanding the extensive powers given to the arbitrator under the 1996 Act, the arbitrator cannot, generally, oppose the agreement of the parties. The parties are at liberty to agree under s.34 that there should be no preliminary issue, and the arbitrator must comply. I suggest that, once the parties have been made aware of the likely consequences of their decision in cost and time but have continued with their agreement, then it would not be reasonable for the arbitrator to resign under s.25.