We regularly represent both investors and States in significant arbitrations under bilateral and multilateral investment treaties. We also help our investor clients navigate complex legal, cultural and political landscapes to secure the best ongoing protection for their foreign investments.
Recent experience includes representing:
Our experienced arbitration practitioners have expertise in representing a wide range of clients across a variety of sectors (including energy, mining, construction, technology, telecommunications, financial services, pharmaceuticals and many more) in complex, high value arbitrations.
Recent experience includes:
6th July 2020 //
In May 2020, NASA announced the Artemis Accords, a set of principles on the basis of which the US would enter into agreements with other countries to govern the civil exploration and use of outer space and lunar resources. As with any agreements, disputes will arise and arbitration may provide an answer.
23rd June 2020 //
The English High Court recently set aside a tribunal’s award on jurisdiction because the tribunal wrongly determined that a party to the arbitration agreement had authority to enter into it as agent for another (MVV Environment Devonport Ltd v NTO Shipping GMBH & CO.KG [2020] EWHC 1371 (Comm)).
Challenges to an award in an English seated arbitration on the basis that the tribunal lacked substantive jurisdiction (which may proceed under Section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996) are relatively rare and notable.
18th June 2020 //
While dissenting opinions in arbitral awards are common practice in some countries, others, including Germany, are hesitant to embrace them. A 2020 decision of the Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt calls into question the enforceability of German domestic awards containing a dissenting opinion.
17th June 2020 //
On June 1, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States in GE Energy Power Conversion France SAS v. Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC, 590 U.S.
_(2020) ruled that the 1958 New York Convention does not prevent non-signatories to an arbitration agreement from compelling arbitration against signatories based on domestic doctrines (such as equitable estoppel).
12th June 2020 //
In May, the London Court of International Arbitration (“LCIA”) published its Annual Casework Report for 2019. It presents the data on referrals to the LCIA during the past year including full LCIA arbitrations and cases where the institution had a more ancillary role, for example for administrative matters, fundholding or as appointing authority.
4th June 2020 //
On 28 May 2020, Linklaters hosted a webinar on foreign investment protection and investor-state arbitration arising out of Covid-19 measures. Speakers from Linklaters provided an overview of investment arbitration, described state measures that could potentially give rise to claims, defences that states might raise and the challenges of enforcing investment treaty awards.
29th May 2020 //
In Carpatsky Petroleum Corp v PLSC Ukrnafta [2020] EWHC 769 (Comm), the Commercial Court dismissed the defendant’s application to set aside an order to enforce a 2010 Stockholm Chamber of Commerce award. The case is a clear illustration that, in seeking enforcement of an award in England, there is little room for a party to diverge from positions it has taken before the tribunal and supervisory courts of the seat.
14th May 2020 //
In an significant decision (Enka Insaat Ve Sanayi AS v OOO “Insurance Company Chubb” & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 574) the Court of Appeal has examined the approach of the English courts to two important questions. First, whether “appropriate forum” considerations can influence whether to grant an anti-suit injunction when England is the seat of arbitration. Second, how to ascertain the governing law of an arbitration agreement.
12th May 2020 //
On 5 May 2020, twenty-three of the European Union’s twenty-seven Member States signed an Agreement for the Termination of Bilateral Investment Treaties Between the Member States of the European Union. What is the impact it will have on past, current and future intra-EU investment arbitration proceedings? What about the non-signatory EU Member States?
7th May 2020 //
In A, B v C, D, E [2020] EWCA Civ 409, the Court of Appeal (“CoA”) held that the Court’s powers in support of arbitral proceedings under section 44(2)(a) of the Arbitration Act 1996 may be exercised against third-parties to the arbitration agreement. In doing so, the CoA overturned the High Court’s decision on the point.
5th May 2020 //
On 22 April 2020, Linklaters and Webber Wentzel hosted a webinar on international arbitration and the Covid-19 health crisis. Speakers addressed the specificities of disputes likely to arise during and after the crisis and the challenges of conducting international arbitrations in this context.
30th April 2020 //
On March 30, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Servotronics, Inc. v. The Boeing Company, No. 18-2454 (4th Cir. 2020) ruled that a commercial arbitration panel is a “foreign or international tribunal” under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 (“Section 1782”), a federal statute that allows parties to obtain evidence in the United States for use in legal proceedings abroad.
24th April 2020 //
In February 2020, the UK Supreme Court wrote another chapter in the long-running Micula v Romania saga, unanimously lifting a stay on enforcement and finding that the Micula brothers and their investment vehicles (the “Micula parties”) can enforce an ICSID arbitration award worth approximately €300 million in the UK.
16th April 2020 //
Due to COVID-19, we now find ourselves in unique and unprecedented circumstances in many aspects of our lives. This includes a substantial change in how to resolve disputes - where flexibility and innovation will be key to resolving them in a fair and timely fashion, in difficult circumstances where parties and their legal representatives are presently deterred or prohibited from holding in-person hearings. In this post we take a look at a way for parties to help smooth the course in the arbitration context.
14th April 2020 //
States around the world are implementing financial measures aimed at mitigating the adverse impacts of Covid-19 on their economies. Such measures will undoubtedly pursue important public policy objectives. State aid may be made available to some and, potentially as a consequence of the resulting budget constraints, may need to be denied or limited to others. However, foreign investors need to be aware that states do not have free reign to disregard their investment treaty obligations, notwithstanding the severity of the crisis faced.
8th April 2020 //
Covid-19 and the dramatic measures taken to control it around the world have impacted virtually all sectors of the global economy. The current crisis finds international arbitration institutions, arbitrators and parties drawing on the global arbitration community’s decades of experience managing arbitral proceedings involving participants situated in different jurisdictions and regions, taking advantage of the latest in information and communication technologies.
1st April 2020 //
As we enter a period in which in-person trials may no longer be possible for some time, Linklaters has been acting in one of the first fully “virtual” trials in English Commercial Court proceedings involving factual and expert witnesses located across the globe, several of whom require an interpreter whilst giving their evidence. In this post, we share two briefing notes which detail our experiences.
31st March 2020 //
In November 2019, the Commission on Arbitration and ADR of the International Chamber of Commerce published a report that examines the role for arbitration and ADR in the resolution of international disputes related to climate change.
Resolving climate change related disputes through arbitration has been an important point of discussion in the arbitration community for the past few years. Although the Report does not recommend any amendments to the current ICC arbitration framework, it does provide guidance and suggests sample wording for several scenarios.
23rd March 2020 //
The spread of COVID-19 is obviously affecting the way in which companies conduct international business. It will also impact the way in which they resolve their disputes.
While procedural hearings by teleconference and remote witness testimony are well-known in arbitration, the arbitration world may have to adapt to much more extensive use of remote communication, both during and outside of formal hearings.
The most recent and most substantial attempt to develop guidance on this is the Seoul Protocol on Video Conferencing in International Arbitration.
12th March 2020 //
In February 2020, ICSID released its latest caseload statistics. The statistics examine trends over the 2019 calendar year as well as the profile of the ICSID caseload historically going back to the first registered case in 1972.
6th March 2020 //
In A, B v C, D, E [2020] EWHC 258 (Comm) (“A v C”), the English High Court held that its powers in support of arbitral proceedings under section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 may not be exercised against third-parties to the arbitration agreement. This decision followed several authorities which considered the Court’s powers under section 44 where permission was required to serve third-parties out of the jurisdiction. However, unlike the previous cases, A v C concerned a UK domiciled third-party.
2nd March 2020 //
Contact one of our experts for more information
