Court intervention

English High Court recognises arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction over settlement agreement in absence of express arbitration clause

In the recent decision of Sonact Group Limited v. Premuda SPA [2018] EWHC 3820 (Comm), the English High Court confirmed its pro-arbitration approach to the interpretation of arbitration agreements. The Court held that an arbitration agreement contained in a charterparty … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration Act 1996, Arbitration clauses, Court intervention, Jurisdiction

Court Support For Arbitration In South Africa: Knowing Where You Stand

In December 2017, South Africa brought into law its first piece of legislation dedicated to international arbitration, the aptly named International Arbitration Act of 2017 (the New Act). The New Act The New Act incorporates the provisions of the UNCITRAL … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Africa, Arbitration laws, Court intervention, Interim relief, Procedures in arbitration, UNCITRAL Model Law

No U-Turns Ahead: Singapore Court of Appeal holds that commencement of court proceedings may lose you the right to later rely on arbitration agreements

In the recent landmark decision of Marty Ltd v Hualon Corp (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd [2018] SGCA 63, the Singapore Court of Appeal held that the commencement of court proceedings notwithstanding the existence of a binding arbitration agreement and without any … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration clauses, Arbitration proceedings, Arbitration rules, Asia, Court intervention, Jurisdiction, Singapore, South East Asia

Swiss Federal Tribunal refuses to set aside the Deutsche Telekom v India Award

We previously reported here that a Geneva-seated UNCITRAL tribunal (the “Tribunal“) constituted under the India-Germany Bilateral Investment Treaty dated 10 July 1995 (the “India-Germany BIT”) found India in breach of its treaty obligations in relation to its cancellation of a … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Challenges to awards, Court intervention, Enforcement - Europe, Europe, India, India Disputes, Investment Arbitration, ISDS

Hong Kong Court of Appeal ends 12-year Xiamen v Eton Properties saga

As discussed in this post, Xiamen Xingjingdi Group Co Ltd (XJ) and various co-defendants affiliated with Eton Properties Ltd (together, EP) have been involved in a long-running dispute in multiple fora, including a PRC-seated CIETAC arbitration and several Hong Kong … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration clauses, Asia, Awards, Court intervention, Damages, East Asia, Enforcement, Hong Kong & China

SPC ISSUES PROVISIONS ON ACTION PRESERVATION IN IP RIGHTS DISPUTES

The Supreme People’s Court of China (SPC) has released a new set of judicial interpretations concerning interim injunction applications for intellectual property rights (IP Rights)-related disputes. The Provisions on Application of Laws in Adjudication of Action Preservation Cases Involving Intellectual … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Asia, Court intervention, Hong Kong & China, Interim relief, Publications and Guides

The ICC standard arbitration clause potentially invalid in Russia

According to Russian media, the ICC has recently applied to the Russian Supreme Court (“SC“) asking that it clarify the approach of Russian courts to the ICC standard arbitration clause demonstrated in one of their cases (No. A40-176466/17). In this … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration clauses, Court intervention, Enforcement, Russia

English High Court refuses to set aside order for enforcement under s103 in long-running dispute regarding ICC award

The English High Court has refused an application under s.103 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (“AA 1996“) to set-aside an order allowing for the enforcement of an ICC award in England. The decision is the culmination of a long-running dispute … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration Act 1996, Challenges to awards, Court intervention, Enforcement, New York Convention

English court sets aside arbitration award for serious irregularity due to tribunal’s non-disclosure of novel point central to award

The odds of successfully challenging an arbitral award in the English Courts on the basis of s68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (serious irregularity) remain low. In the recent past over 95% of s68 challenges have been unsuccessful and in … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration Act 1996, Challenges to awards, Court intervention, Europe

Indian Supreme Court rules that Indian courts have jurisdiction to hear an application to set aside an award issued in Malaysia

In its recent decision in Union of India v Hardy Exploration and Production (available here), the Supreme Court of India found that a contractual clause stipulating Kuala Lumpur as the ‘venue’ of arbitration did not amount to a choice of … Continue reading

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arbitration clauses, Arbitration laws, Arbitration proceedings, Challenges to awards, Court intervention, Enforcement, India