- January 31, 2019
Interpretation of pathological clauses: a cautionary tale?
The term “pathological clauses”, coined by Frédéric Eisemann, is widely used to describe arbitration clauses with apparent defect(s) liable to disrupt the smooth progress of the arbitration. Such clauses may be a source of strife for the whole duration of the dispute – from jurisdictional battles to challenges at the enforcement stage.
- October 2, 2017
Disclosure of third party funding: Hong Kong and Singapore setting the trend?
Third party funding (TPF) has become an established feature of the arbitral landscape. It is now not uncommon for parties to consider TPF when commencing or responding to an arbitration, choosing their counsel, or even when negotiating an arbitration agreement. This raises the question whether such arrangements should be disclosed, and if so, the scope … Continue reading Disclosure of third party funding: Hong Kong and Singapore setting the trend? →