REUTERS | Max Whittaker
July 15, 2016

Summary procedures in international arbitration: a case for flexibility

It should not be a controversial proposition that an international arbitration tribunal should have the power to dismiss hopeless claims and defences without having to incur the time and expense of a full-blown arbitration. There has been some doubt about the tribunals’ jurisdiction to adopt a summary procedure and calls have been made to clarify the position, for example by amending institutional rules. Indeed, some rules already contain express provisions for summary disposal of a case, such as the JAMS Comprehensive Rules or the procedure under rule 41.5 of the ICSID Arbitration Rules. The latest institution to consider including such a provision in its rules is the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (Article 39 of the draft new rules). Continue reading →

REUTERS | Eric Vida
July 11, 2016

The European Union, investment treaties and investment arbitration post-Brexit

This blog considers the impact of Brexit on investment treaties and investment arbitration in the European Union (EU), in particular how the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU will affect:

Continue reading →

REUTERS |
July 8, 2016

Bremaining optimistic: impact on London arbitration following Brexit

This blog considers the impact of Brexit on London arbitration and, in particular, the effect of losing many EU Regulations that currently form the core of England’s conflicts, and choice, of law positions in three key areas:

Continue reading →

REUTERS | Ilya Naymushin
July 1, 2016

The appointment and confirmation of arbitrators and adjudicators: why the secrecy?

The implications of repeat appointments of arbitrators and adjudicators are very much in the zeitgeist. The Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) announced recently that of its 110 adjudicators, 85% got at least one referral every six months. In Cofely v Bingham, we learned that over three years, 18% of Mr Bingham’s appointments and 25% of his income derived from cases involving the same claims consultant. In W v M, an arbitrator was appointed by the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) without anyone (not even him) being aware that the respondent was a subsidiary of a substantial client of his firm, contrary to paragraph 1.4 of the Non-Waivable Red List of the IBA Guidelines. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Lee Jae-Won
June 29, 2016

1996 and all that: Happy 20th birthday to the Arbitration Act 1996

The Arbitration Act 1996 and London arbitration have come in for a bit of a battering recently, most notably in the much-discussed 2016 Bailii Lecture, in which Lord Thomas, Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, called for greater use of the courts as a way of ensuring the development of the common law. So it was a pleasant change to attend a celebration of the 1996 Act, on the eve of its 20th birthday. The event, entitled “1996 and All That: A Memorable History of (Arbitration in) England”, was hosted by Allen & Overy (A&O) and featured speakers from both A&O and Essex Court Chambers. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Edgard Garrido
June 28, 2016

On the rise or on the rack? The potential impact of the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements on the use of international arbitration

Arbitration is often lauded as the most popular method for resolving international commercial disputes, no doubt thanks to the success and near-universal coverage of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. The Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements (the Hague Convention), concluded in June 2005, attempts to recreate this success in the context of court litigation. First, it requires the courts of contracting states to give effect to exclusive jurisdiction clauses in favour of the courts of another contracting state. Secondly, it seeks to create a similar worldwide automatic recognition and enforcement regime for the court judgments of contracting states. However, until recently, only Mexico had acceded to the Hague Convention and it appeared as though it might be “on the rack”. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Maxim Shemetov
June 22, 2016

Privilege and parties’ expectations in international arbitration

Legal privilege was developed in common law jurisdictions to limit the scope of parties’ disclosure obligations under the local rules of civil procedure. However, since the disclosure obligations in continental procedural law traditionally were very limited, no corresponding privilege rules were developed in civil law jurisdictions. Continue reading →