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:
21st June 2021 //
In Armada Ship Management (S) Pte Ltd v Schiste Oil and Gas Nigeria Ltd [2021] EWHC 1094 (Comm), the English High Court provided important guidance regarding preliminary applications to it to determine the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal under s32 of the Arbitration Act 1996.
11th June 2021 //
In May 2021, two more foreign arbitral institutions obtained “permanent arbitral institution” (“PAI”) status under Russian law: the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce and the Singapore International Arbitration Centre. It is expected that they will have the same powers as Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre and the Vienna International Arbitral Centre which both gained PAI status in 2019.
7th June 2021 //
The Russian courts have resolved the first ever anti-suit injunction case in Russia. On 28 May 2021, a judge of the Supreme Court of Russia upheld the court judgments of lower instances and refused to refer the dispute to the consideration of the panel of judges in the Supreme Court of Russia.
3rd June 2021 //
In India v Vedanta Resources [2021] SGCA 50, the Singapore Court of Appeal recently rejected an attempt to obtain declarations on points of law regarding confidentiality as they were an illegitimate attempt to relitigate issues already determined by the tribunal. The case arose in the context of the cross-disclosure of documents between two related bilateral investment treaty arbitrations, in relation to retroactive tax bills
1st June 2021 //
In CJD v CJE and CJF [2021] SGHC 61, the High Court of Singapore was asked to determine when a party may be joined to an arbitration under the “forced joinder” provisions of the 2014 Rules of the London Court of International Arbitration.
13th May 2021 //
In our recent blog post, “Cyber hack challenges in international arbitration” we took a look at the steps parties might wish to consider to help limit the chances of problems arising in their arbitration. If there are suspicions that security has been compromised, however, what might be the consequences for the tribunal? We take a look at some recent events and how to avoid some of the pitfalls.
11th May 2021 //
Under section 90 of the Bahamas Arbitration Act 2009, which is modelled on, and materially identical to, s.68 of the English Arbitration Act 1996, an arbitral award can be challenged on the grounds of serious irregularity where it is of a particularised kind and has caused, or will cause, substantial injustice. In RAV v Therapy Beach Club [2021] UKPC 8 the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has considered whether, for that purpose, substantial injustice requires both the applicant, and the court, to expressly deal with the point.
28th April 2021 //
Linklaters has assisted the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce (UKJT) on its recently published Digital Dispute Resolution Rules. The rules, which can be used in the context of on-chain digital relationships and smart contracts, establish a new arbitration procedure aimed at facilitating the rapid and cost-effective resolution of disputes arising out of the use of digital assets, smart contracts, blockchain and fintech.
22nd April 2021 //
Arbitration proceedings are not immune to cyber-attacks. An international arbitration proceeding taking place in Sao Paulo reportedly faces difficulties after the defendant raised allegations of hacking by its adversary. We take a look at this development and the mitigants that parties to arbitral proceedings might consider taking to help shield the process from these.
Contact one of our experts for more information
