Tag Archives: UNCITRAL Model Law

Australian Court provides guidance on Art 33(3) of the Model Law, the doctrine of functus officio and when a ‘Final Award’ is not ‘final’

In Blanalko Pty Ltd v Lysaght Building Solutions Pty Ltd [2017] VSC 97, Croft J of the Victorian Supreme Court confirmed that a party is not required to rely on, or comply with the time constraint in, Art 33(3) of … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration laws, Australia, Awards, Costs, Court intervention, Stays, UNCITRAL Model Law

New Arbitration Law in Qatar

Introduction The Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al Thani, issued Law No 2 of 2017 on 16 February 2017 (the "New Arbitration Law"). The New Arbitration Law has not yet been published in the Official Gazette and implementing … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration laws, Arbitration rules, Middle East, Procedures in arbitration, UNCITRAL Model Law

‘Bare’ arbitration clauses and the extent to which the Singapore court may assist

In K.V.C Rice Intertrade Co Ltd v Asian Mineral Resources Pte Ltd and another Suit [2017] SGHC 32 ("KVC Action") the Singapore High Court discussed the extent to which the Singapore courts and the Singapore International Arbitration Centre, in its … Continue reading

2 Comments

Filed under Arbitration clauses, Asia, South East Asia

Australian Federal Court stays winding up application to allow arbitration of underlying dispute

The Federal Court of Australia has recently held that a winding up application made in respect of a joint venture company should be stayed and the substantive underlying matters of dispute between the joint venture parties be referred to arbitration … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitrability, Arbitration clauses, Arbitration laws, Australia, Jurisdiction, Stays, UNCITRAL Model Law

Hong Kong Court of Appeal refuses to set aside final award

In a judgment handed down on  15 August 2016, the Hong Kong Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal seeking to set an ICC award (Tronic International Pte Ltd v Topco Scientific Co Ltd and Others CACV 235/2013).

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration laws, Arbitration proceedings, Arbitration rules, Challenges to awards, Court intervention, Hong Kong & China, UNCITRAL Model Law

Enactment of the Abu Dhabi Global Market Arbitration Regulations 2015: the creation of a new “pro-arbitration” seat in the Middle East?

The Abu Dhabi Global Market ("ADGM"), a financial freezone in the United Arab Emirates, has enacted new arbitration regulations based on the UNCITRAL Model Law to create a new "pro-arbitration" seat in the Middle East. The ADGM Arbitration Regulations 2015 … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration laws, DIFC, Middle East

Australian courts take a uniform approach to interpretation of the Model Law

In Cameron Australasia Pty Ltd v AED Oil Limited,[1] the Supreme Court of Victoria refused to set aside a domestic arbitral award on the basis that the applicant was unable to present its case and was denied procedural fairness. The … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration laws, Australia, Challenges to awards

Hong Kong court sets aside part of an arbitral award on the basis of serious breach of due process

In China Property Development (Holdings) Ltd v Mandecly Ltd HCCT 53/2010, the Hong Kong Court of First Instance (the CFI) has set aside part of an arbitral Award, on the basis that the applicant had been denied an opportunity to … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Awards, Enforcement, Hong Kong & China

The Singapore Court adopts a pragmatic approach in its consideration of various aspects of a jurisdictional challenge

In the case of AQZ v ARA , the Singapore High Court has provided useful guidance and clarification on a number of procedural issues relating to jurisdictional challenges which will be of interest to arbitration practitioners both in Singapore and … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration rules, Asia, Jurisdiction, South East Asia

Hong Kong court confirms pro-arbitration interpretation of mandatory stay provision

In Schindler Lifts (Hong Kong) Ltd v Sui Chong Construction and Engineering Co Ltd [2014] HKEC 1967, the Hong Kong District Court ordered stay of an action pending referral of the dispute to arbitration, despite the defendant having filed a … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration clauses, Hong Kong & China