Dispute Resolution choices for Finance Parties: A practical look at recent developments affecting dispute resolution options

Thursday 14th July 2016, 12.45 – 1.45pm BST

Finance parties are often inclined to revert to favoured dispute resolution choices in their transactions. This default position is largely based on their perception of what offers the greatest flexibility or the lowest risk or both. However, the legal landscape moves fast and there have been a number of recent developments that have challenged the assumptions supporting these default choices. Indeed, with careful drafting, finance parties are in a better position than ever with regard to their choice of forum for resolving disputes. 

In this highly practical webinar our panel will explore a number of recent developments which have a significant impact on dispute resolution choices in finance transactions and affect how those clauses can be structured. The topics our speakers will explore include:

  • the end of the threat of an "Italian torpedo" within the EU?
  • the implications of Brexit for dispute resolution and governing law clauses
  • the potential for a summary judgment style process in arbitration
  • recent changes to the position on unilateral option clauses in transactions related to France
  • alternatives to arbitration in Asia Pacific: the Singapore International Commercial Court

Our speakers will also discuss the issue of "Brexit-proofing" contracts in the context of dispute resolution.


Vanessa Naish, Professional Support Consultant, Herbert Smith Freehills LLP


Nick Peacock, Partner, Herbert Smith Freehills LLP

Adam Johnson, Partner, Herbert Smith Freehills LLP

What is a webinar?

  • A webinar is an online seminar delivered to your desktop. On the day of the webinar you will be sent a link to login to the live event.
  • The webinar is recorded so you can listen again. If you are unable to listen to the live event, register anyway and you will be able to listen to the recorded version when convenient.
  • Participation in webinars enables you to record 1 hour on your continuing competence personal training record. Further guidance can be found on the attachments tab.
  • Audio is available via your PC. Click here to see if your system supports live audio streaming.
  • The webinar is interactive and we welcome questions from our audience. Email your comments to the speakers on the day using the appropriate tab on the player.
  • Check the attachments tab for a PDF copy of the slides and other relevant material.

… and the benefits to you

  • One off registration – Register once to access any event. This will create your own account on BrightTALK, our webinar service provider. After registering you will gain access to a full programme of relevant events.
  • Easier access to archived webinars – Each practice area channel holds full details of events held during the past year as well as forthcoming webinars.
  • Add events to your calendar – When choosing a webinar there is now an option to add an appointment to your Outlook calendar. You can also manage your email alerts.
  • Keep up-to-date with topics of emerging importance.
  • Hear our experienced speakers from across our global network without leaving your office.

For further information or to register, please contact arbitration.info@hsf.com.

Nicholas Peacock
Nicholas Peacock
+44 20 7466 2803
Adam Johnson
Adam Johnson
+44 20 7466 2064
Vanessa Naish
Vanessa Naish
Professional Support Consultant
+44 20 7466 2112

High Court confirms unilateral jurisdiction clause is valid under English Law

In the recent case of Mauritius Commercial Bank Ltd v Hestia Holdings Ltd and Another [2013] EWHC 1328 (Comm), the English Commercial Court confirmed that one-way or unilateral jurisdiction clauses (in which one party can bring proceedings in one jurisdiction only, whilst the other has the option to bring proceedings in other jurisdictions) are valid under English law. In so doing, the Commercial Court has not followed the approach of the French Cour de cassation in Mme X v Bank Privée Edmond de Rothschild (the “Mme X Case“), in which a one-way jurisdiction clause was found to violate Article 23 of the Brussels Regulation because of its potestative nature (a potestative condition being one whose satisfaction is completely within the power of one of the parties, with no mutuality of obligation). The treatment of unilateral jurisdiction and arbitration clauses was discussed in our previous post.

The Mme X Case caused concern amongst many commercial parties, in particular financial institutions which favour such clauses. Whilst such unilateral jurisdiction clauses may not be upheld in all jurisdictions, it is some comfort that, in a robust judgment, the Commercial Court upheld the jurisdiction clause and, obiter, concluded that even more one-sided clauses than the one before it would not violate the public policy of equal access to justice enshrined in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

To read the full post on our Litigation blog, please click here.

For further information, please contact Nick Peacock, Partner, Hannah Ambrose, Professional Support Lawyer or your usual Herbert Smith Freehills contact.

Nicholas Peacock
Nicholas Peacock
+44 20 7466 2803
Hannah Ambrose
Hannah Ambrose
Professional Support Lawyer
+44 20 7466 7585