In Union of India v Reliance Industries Limited and another  EWHC 1407, the English High Court considered the degree to which, regardless of the substantive law to be applied by it, an English seated arbitral tribunal could still apply English principles of abuse of process to preclude a party from raising arguments which it should have raised earlier.
On 13 June, the United States Supreme Court handed down a seminal decision concerning the extent to which federal law, in the form of U.S.C. §1782, permits participants in foreign arbitration proceedings to subpoena evidence from U.S. parties. We take a look at the decision and its implications.
On the first anniversary of its launch, we take a closer look at one of the most recent dispute resolution services offered by the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce to see what it adds to the global alternative dispute resolution scene.
In this article, Nishant Choudhary (Partner) and Rohan Bishayee (Legal Adviser) from DFDL examine the emergency arbitration landscape in three countries, Cambodia, Thailand, and Myanmar, and provide an overview of the legal framework, practical challenges, and the road ahead.
One of the major arbitration law novelties included in the to be implemented structural reform of the Italian justice system is, undoubtedly, the power for arbitral tribunals seated in Italy to issue interim measures in support of their proceedings. This long awaited change will put to an end one of the main differences, in the arbitration sphere, between Italy and other European countries.
Recent surveys of Polish case law on the setting aside of arbitral awards shows that Poland is an arbitration friendly country. The statistical data made available by the Polish Ministry of Justice shows that between 2016 and 2020, only c. 7.24 % proceedings ended in the arbitral award being set aside.
In Aquavita International SA v Indagro SA  EWHC 892 (Comm), the English Commercial Court granted an anti-suit injunction to restrain Brazilian court proceedings where those proceedings would be an attempt to “outflank” the parties’ arbitration agreement (rather than in aid of the agreed procedure).The case considers where the line will be drawn.
In a recent judgment (PJSC National Bank Trust & Anor v Mints and Others  EWHC 871 (Comm)) the English High Court considered the degree to which an arbitration award could have preclusive effects against non-parties to the arbitral proceedings. Although it did not completely rule this out, it set a high bar.
In Africa Finance Corp & others v Aiteo Eastern E & P Company Limited  EWHC 768 (Comm), the English Commercial Court granted an anti-suit injunction despite a 13-month delay in seeking it since this was justifiable partly as the parties had been engaged in negotiations to facilitate payment of the disputed debt. The case illustrates that although promptness is important in such an application, the English court will exercise its discretion to take into account the circumstances of a case.