Posts from Keating Chambers

Botas v Tepe: state immunity in the context of arbitration enforcement

On 15 November 2018, in apparent disbelief at the deal which he had helped negotiate, the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, Dominic Raab, beat an impressive retreat into political oblivion. When some of our politicians seem immune to their state responsibilities, what better time is there to consider the application of state … Continue reading Botas v Tepe: state immunity in the context of arbitration enforcement

What’s the “matter”: Sodzawiczny v Ruhan and a mandatory stay under section 9 of the English Arbitration Act 1996

The recent case of Sodzawiczny v Ruhan provides useful guidance on the meaning of a “matter” for the purpose of a mandatory stay under section 9 of the English Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996).

Thursday morning at the Palladium

Introduction Last week’s English Commercial Court decision in Goodwood Investments Holdings Inc v Thyssenkrupp Industrial Solutions AG (M/Y “Palladium”) was a rare sighting of an application under section 45 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996). Section 45 provides a route whereby the court may determine any question of law arising in the course of … Continue reading Thursday morning at the Palladium

An erosion of the Fiona Trust “one-stop shop” presumption?

In Michael Wilson & Partners Limited v John Forster Emmott, the English Court of Appeal allowed an appeal in part against the first instance decision of O’Farrell J to maintain an anti-suit injunction in respect of proceedings in New South Wales which were, it had been said, brought in breach of an agreement to arbitrate … Continue reading An erosion of the Fiona Trust “one-stop shop” presumption?

When an arbitrator and party representative are from the same set – conflict in Chambers?

It is common for an arbitrator and party representative to be from the same set of chambers, particularly if the dispute relates to a specialist area of law where there may be a small pool of arbitrators and counsel from which to draw. Is it an issue? And if it is, what should be done?

Africa risen!

Following the great recession in 2008, with competition fierce amid falling revenues in more established markets, some of the major London-based law firms turned to Africa as an untapped area of growth. Many of these firms already had long-standing relationships with firms on the continent and there was already a significant amount of international arbitrations … Continue reading Africa risen!

Just to clarify: Xstrata Coal and Article 27.1 of the LCIA Rules

The recent decision in Xstrata Coal Queensland Pty Ltd v Benxi Iron & Steel (Group) International Economic & Trading Co Ltd provides useful guidance on when a court may extend time to allow an arbitral tribunal to clarify or remove ambiguity in their award by issuing a memorandum pursuant to Article 27.1 of the London … Continue reading Just to clarify: Xstrata Coal and Article 27.1 of the LCIA Rules

The future of institutional arbitration in Anglophone, Francophone and Lusophone Africa

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) is experiencing an increasing number of arbitrations where one of the parties, and more significantly the claimant, is from Sub-Saharan Africa. The range of disputes is broadening from resource extraction to major infrastructure projects, farming and even football. There is a strong correlation between the growth in external investment … Continue reading The future of institutional arbitration in Anglophone, Francophone and Lusophone Africa