REUTERS | Yuya Shino
February 14, 2019

Third party funding in arbitration: indirect reforms in Nigeria

Followers of this blog will be aware that third party funding (TPF), by which a commercial fund finances the costs of proceedings in return for a share of any damages awarded, is increasingly widespread with a number of jurisdictions taking the necessary steps to introduce it into their law as they look to increase their attractiveness as arbitral venues. Nigeria is no exception and proposed amendments to its law would see Nigeria join this global trend. Continue reading →

REUTERS | David W Cerny
February 11, 2019

The Prague Rules: all change?

Samuel Johnson famously said that change should be avoided unless there was “reason sufficient to balance the inconvenience”. The prevailing climate today is rather more innovation-minded and it is often assumed that change is for the better, perhaps not always with much analysis of the potential downside. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Darrin Zammit Lupi
February 8, 2019

EU member states agree to terminate their intra-EU BITs: is this the end of intra-EU BIT arbitrations and what about Brexit?

In mid-January this year, all 28 EU member states signed declarations committing to terminate their intra-EU bilateral investment treaties (BITs). 21 EU member states (including the United Kingdom), went further and stated that the Achmea decision (described further below) also applies to intra-EU disputes pursuant to the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT). Continue reading →

REUTERS | Stephanie Mcgehee
February 7, 2019

GCC investment laws: to arbitrate or not to arbitrate, that is the question (Part 1)

Driven by an incentive to promote foreign direct investment (FDI) in their respective economies, the majority of Gulf Corporation Council (GCC) countries have adopted stand-alone FDI legislation. These include Kuwait (Kuwait Law No. 116/2013 Amending the Law on the Regulation of Direct Investment of Foreign Capital in the State of Kuwait, in force since 16 December 2013), Oman (Foreign Capital Investment Law, Oman Sultani Decree No. 102/1994 to Promulgate the Foreign Capital Investment Law, in force since 2 November 1996), Qatar (Qatar Law No. 13/2000 on the Regulation of the Foreign Capital Investment in the Economic Activity, in force since 25 November 2000), Saudi Arabia (Saudi Arabia Royal Decree No. M1/1421 on the Approval of the Foreign Investment Law, in force since 16 September 2002), and most recently the United Arab Emirates (UAE) (UAE Federal Decree Law No. 19/2018 on Foreign Direct Investment, issued on 23 September 2018, which entered into force on 1 October 2018). The only remaining exception is Bahrain. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Esam Al-Fetori
February 5, 2019

Foreign Office travel advisory: service of an enforcement order on a sovereign state must be effected through the FCO

A recent decision of Males LJ in the English Commercial Court, General Dynamics United Kingdom Ltd v Libya, held that service of an order permitting the claimant to enforce an arbitral award against a sovereign state must be effected through the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). This blog concentrates on the practical implications for clients and practitioners. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Gleb Garanich
February 4, 2019

Enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Russia: what we can learn from recent statistics?

In November 2018, the Russian Arbitration Association (the RAA) published its study on the Application of the New York Convention in Russia during 2008-2017. The study is a significant work performed by the working group headed by Roman Zykov and comprising lawyers from leading law firms who thoroughly studied published cases over the period of nearly a decade and analysed them within a significant number of parameters. It provides a very useful insight into the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Russia. It captures nearly all available court practice regarding application of the New York Convention in Russia. Prior to 2008, the judgments have not been published on a regular basis, whereas starting from around 2008 nearly every decision of commercial courts of all instances is available online. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Edgar Su
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. Continue reading →