The Swiss arbitration law ushered in a new era on 1 January 2021, when the country’s amended Chapter 12 of the Swiss Private International Law Act (PILA), which governs international arbitrations seated in Switzerland, came into effect.
REUTERS | Denis Balibouse
January 20, 2021
Updated PILA: Switzerland revamps arbitration law
REUTERS | Smith Lee
January 19, 2021
Drafting arbitration clauses: lessons learned in 2020
One of the many uncertainties of Brexit is the impact it will have on the enforcement of English court jurisdiction clauses and English court judgments across the EU. Despite the hopes of the legal community, the Trade and Cooperation Agreement does not contain any provisions on civil judicial cooperation, so there remains uncertainty over what will replace the previous regime as set out in the Brussels Recast Regulation and the Lugano Convention. The EU may agree to the UK acceding to the Lugano Convention but, for now, jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments will be determined by the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements or national laws.
REUTERS | Jason Lee
January 7, 2021
Arbitration Act 1996: is it time for an update?
“The 1996 Act is not a complete code of the law of arbitration, but allows judges to develop the common law in areas which the Act does not address.”
So said Lord Hodge in his lead judgment in the widely reported UK Supreme Court decision in Halliburton v Chubb.
REUTERS | Brian Snyder
January 5, 2021
What happens when an arbitral tribunal makes a mistake? Doglemor Trade Ltd v Caledor Consulting Ltd
There are various means open to a party to an arbitration to seek correction of a mistake by an arbitral tribunal depending on the nature of the mistake. For example, section 57 of the English Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) empowers the tribunal of its own initiative or upon the application of a party to:
- Correct an award so as to remove any clerical mistake or error arising from an accidental slip or omission or clarify or remove any ambiguity in the award (section 57(3)(a)).
- Make an additional award in respect of any claim which was presented to the tribunal but was not dealt with in the award (section 57(3)(b)).
Section 69 of the AA 1996 provides a procedure for challenging mistaken determinations of law. Section 68 provides a procedure for challenging awards affected by serious irregularity, including irregularity caused by mistake or inadvertence on the part of the tribunal.
REUTERS | Ali Hashisho
What was once a mirage on the horizon of the arbitration landscape of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has now become reality under the UAE Federal Arbitration Law (FAL), which entered into force with effect from 16 June 2018. Following a consistent line of recent case law precedent, there can be no more doubt that the doctrine of apparent authority applies to the formation of arbitration agreements under the FAL and as such relaxes the strict requirement for a special power of attorney in the terms of article 58(2) of the UAE Civil Procedures Code (CPC). That requirement, which used to exist under the former UAE Arbitration Chapter on the basis that arbitration qualifies as an exceptional form of dispute resolution in derogation from the fundamental right to go to court, persists under the FAL in the terms of article 4(1), pursuant to which “on the pain of nullity”, only an original rightsholder or “a representative with a specific authority to arbitrate” is empowered to bind to arbitration.
REUTERS | David W Cerny
December 23, 2020
Season’s greetings from the Practical Law Arbitration Blog
The Practical Law Arbitration Blog will resume in early January 2021. Until then, from the Practical Law Arbitration team, thank you to all of our contributors for another packed year of excellent commentary, to you for reading. Happy holidays and stay safe all.
REUTERS | Loriene Perera
December 23, 2020
Oh, what a year! 2020 arbitration year in review
2020 may have been many things, but it will not have been forgettable. While the biggest story in the world of arbitration was undoubtedly the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, it did not stop major steps being taken to reform investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), significant arbitration decisions being handed down by the English courts and arbitration practitioners having another busy year of bringing and defending claims.
REUTERS | David Mdzinarishvili
December 22, 2020
Halliburton v Chubb: UK Supreme Court clarifies position on arbitrators’ duties of impartiality and disclosure in London-seated arbitrations
In Halliburton Company v Chubb Bermuda Insurance Ltd, the UK Supreme Court dismissed Halliburton’s appeal concerning its application to remove an arbitrator for apparent bias on the facts. However, it also emphasised the importance of arbitrator impartiality in London-seated arbitrations. The judgment addresses the circumstances in which an arbitrator may appear to be biased and the scope of an arbitrator’s duty of disclosure in this context.
REUTERS | Edgar Su
December 22, 2020
Drafter beware: High Court of Singapore confirms approach to interpreting apparently “conflicting” arbitration and jurisdiction clauses
On 16 November 2020, the High Court of Singapore rejected an application from the defendant to the litigation for a stay in favour of arbitration. In doing so, the court provided a helpful summary of the court’s analysis when faced with prima facie overlapping dispute resolution clauses in the same or related agreements. On the facts of the case, the court concluded that the parties’ intentions, objectively ascertained, were that, notwithstanding the existence of an arbitration agreement, a separate jurisdiction clause in favour of the Singapore courts operated as an effective carve out for certain defined disputes.
REUTERS | Dinuka Liyanawatte
December 21, 2020
Vodafone v India award: risky business of retroactive taxation
In a recent, still unpublished award, India lost an arbitration dispute initiated by Vodafone because India had imposed a hefty tax bill of several billion dollars retroactively.