In The Republic of Korea v Mohammed Reza Dayyani and others [2019] EWHC 3580 (Comm), the English High Court rejected an application by the Republic of Korea (“Korea”) to set aside an investment arbitration award pursuant to s67 of the Arbitration Act 1996, finding that a London-seated ad hoc tribunal had substantive jurisdiction to hear disputes between Korea and a group of Iranian investors (the “Dayyanis”) arising under a bilateral investment treaty between Korea and…
As the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) continues to spread across the world, businesses are facing significant levels of…
UNITED KINGDOM Kate Corby, Judith Mulholland and Katia Contos A. LEGISLATION AND RULES A.1 Legislation International arbitration in…
The LCIA’s 2018 Casework Report provides another interesting snapshot of LCIA arbitration in numbers, including improvements in a number of areas since its 2017 Casework Report. Caseload overview In 2018, a record 271 arbitrations were referred to the LCIA under the LCIA rules – an increase of over 16% on the 233 arbitrations referred under the LCIA rules in 2017. The LCIA’s caseload continued to be dominated by the Banking and Finance and Energy and…
The English High Court has confirmed in Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering Company Ltd v Songa Offshore Equinox…
The Commercial Court has upheld a challenge under section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (“AA 1996”) to…
The case of Agile Holdings Corp v Essar Shipping Ltd[1] clarifies the circumstances in which the court can revisit the decision to grant leave to appeal an award on a point of law under section 69 of the UK Arbitration Act 1996 (“AA”) at the merits stage. The law Section 69 of the UK provides narrow grounds on which a party can appeal an award on a point of law. Before an appeal can be…
In April 2018, the Court of Appeal issued its decision in Halliburton Company v (1) Chubb Bermuda Insurance…
The rejection of SCM Financial Overseas Ltd’s (“SCM”) challenge to an US$ 860 million award in favour of…
Overview In A v B [2017] EWHC 3417 (Comm), the High Court considered whether a single Request for Arbitration was valid in the context of multiple disputes arising under two separate arbitration agreements. The judgment provides clarification on the time limits for a party to issue a jurisdictional challenge when arbitral proceedings are underway. Factual Background The parties entered into two contracts, governed by English law, for two consignments of crude oil. The contracts were…